DOCSLIB.ORG

Greater Eurasia: the Emperor's New Clothes Or an Idea Whose Time Has

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Greater Eurasia: the Emperor's New Clothes Or an Idea Whose Time Has Études de l’Ifri Russie.Nei.Reports 27 GREATER EURASIA The Emperor’s New Clothes or an Idea whose Time Has Come? Bobo LO July 2019 Russia/NIS Center The Institut français des relations internationales (Ifri) is a research center and a forum for debate on major international political and economic issues. Headed by Thierry de Montbrial since its founding in 1979, Ifri is a non- governmental, non-profit organization. As an independent think tank, Ifri sets its own research agenda, publishing its findings regularly for a global audience. Taking an interdisciplinary approach, Ifri brings together political and economic decision-makers, researchers and internationally renowned experts to animate its debate and research activities. The opinions expressed in this text are the responsibility of the author alone. This text is published with the support of DGRIS (Directorate General for International Relations and Strategy) under “Russia, Caucasus and Eastern Europe Observatory”. ISBN: 979-10-373-0036-2 © All rights reserved, Ifri, 2019 How to quote this document: Bobo Lo, “Greater Eurasia: The Emperor’s New Clothes or an Idea whose Time Has Come?”, Russie.Nei.Reports, No. 27, Ifri, July 2019. Ifri 27 rue de la Procession 75740 Paris Cedex 15—FRANCE Tel.: +33 (0)1 40 61 60 00—Fax: +33 (0)1 40 61 60 60 Email: [email protected] Website: Ifri.org Author Bobo Lo is an Associate Research Fellow with the Russia/NIS Center at the French Institute of International Relations (Ifri). He was previously Head of the Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House and Deputy Head of Mission at the Australian Embassy in Moscow. He is also a Non-Resident Fellow with the Lowy Institute, Sydney, Australia. Dr. Lo writes extensively on Russian foreign policy. His most recent book, A Wary Embrace: What the China-Russia Relationship Means for the World, was published by Penguin Random House for the Lowy Institute in 2017. Other major books include Russia and the New World Disorder (2015), Axis of Convenience: Moscow, Beijing and the New Geopolitics (2008), Vladimir Putin and the Evolution of Russian Foreign Policy (2003), and Russian Foreign Policy in the Post-Soviet Era: Reality, Illusion and Mythmaking (2002). Shorter recent writings include “Going Legit? The Foreign Policy of Vladimir Putin”, Lowy Analysis, September 2018; “Chutzpah and Realism: Vladimir Putin and the Making of Russian Foreign Policy”, Russie.Nei.Visions, No. 108, June 2018; “An Accident Waiting to Happen: Trump, Putin, and the US-Russia Relationship”, Lowy Analysis, October 2017; and “New Order for Old Triangles? The Russia-China-India Matrix”, Russie.Nei.Visions, No. 100, April 2017. Abstract The Greater Eurasia project has emerged as the poster-child of Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy, symbolic of a resurgent and self-confident Russia. It is at once a geopolitical enterprise, political slogan, economic aspiration, and ideological construct. It is an attempt to impart dynamism to the Eurasian Economic Union. Most important of all, it seeks to establish a new, post- American order in which Russia plays a pivotal role. Greater Eurasia is a work in progress. Many of its goals are speculative and the challenges are formidable. To have any chance of success, Moscow must be able to manage the competing interests of other state-actors, in particular China; transcend the limitations of Russian power; and demonstrate sustained political will. There is little evidence so far that it is up to the task. Today, Greater Eurasia is more anti-project than project, an expression of Russian animus toward the liberal international order rather than a serious blueprint for global governance. Yet nothing is fixed. There is still scope for a positive vision to emerge out of the current confusion. Equally, though, the Greater Eurasia project could suffer the fate of previous major Kremlin undertakings, drifting along with little purpose and diminishing conviction. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 9 DEFINING GREATER EURASIA .......................................................... 11 THE EVOLUTION OF GREATER EURASIA ........................................... 15 THE MULTIPLE AGENDAS OF GREATER EURASIA ............................. 19 A TEMPLATE FOR GLOBAL GOVERNANCE?........................................ 25 CHALLENGES ...................................................................................... 29 OUTLOOK ............................................................................................ 39 Introduction Greater Eurasia (Bolshaia Evraziia) has emerged as the poster-child of Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy. It has become symbolic of a resurgent and self-confident Russia, operating in an ever more disorderly world. To its advocates, it captures the zeitgeist of the early 21st century, reflecting both a strong sense of tradition and an image of modernity. Yet there is little consensus on the meaning and purpose of Greater Eurasia. It is a Protean concept—at once a geopolitical enterprise, political slogan, economic aspiration, and ideological construct. This versatility has enhanced its appeal to the Kremlin, appearing to offer abundant opportunity while imposing few obligations. But such flexibility also carries within it the seeds of potential failure: a lack of clarity and focus resulting in abstractions, wavering political enthusiasm, and the indifference or hostility of others. In this essay, I examine the concept of Greater Eurasia and its place in Putin’s foreign policy. Is it an idea whose time has come, a necessary response to the challenges facing not only Russia, but international society in general? Or is it a geopolitical project in all but name, whose overriding purpose is to promote Russia as a global power in a new, post-American order? I begin by considering the term “Greater Eurasia”, and how the concept itself has risen to such prominence. The essay then examines the “meat” of the Greater Eurasia project—its economic, security, ideological, and geopolitical dimensions—and the challenges of implementing its ambitious agenda. Finally, I speculate on what the future may hold. Does Greater Eurasia herald a far-reaching political and normative transformation? Or is it just another “big idea” devoid of real substance, and destined to return to obscurity after a brief period in the limelight? Defining Greater Eurasia The Polish scholar Marcin Kaczmarski rightly observes that “Russia lacks a clear vision for ‘Greater Eurasia’, which remains a vague and loosely defined concept.”1 Attempting to grasp it presents several challenges, the first of which is the sheer variety of possible definitions and understandings. Another, related problem is determining its scope. Is Greater Eurasia primarily a geographical construct and, if so, how far does it extend? Or should we think of it more in functional terms? Is it an economic framework, the basis for a new world order, a geopolitical mechanism, or all of the above? Then there is the difficulty of distinguishing—or disentangling— Greater Eurasia from existing ventures in Russian foreign policy, such as the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) and Moscow’s “Turn to the East” (povorot na vostok). Regional or global project? In some respects, Greater Eurasia appears intended as an improved or expanded version of the EEU. President Putin hinted as much when he formally introduced the idea at the 2016 St Petersburg International Economic Forum: “Our partners and we think that the [Eurasian Economic Union] can become one of the centers of a greater emergent integration area … Now we propose considering the prospects for a more extensive Eurasian partnership involving the [EEU] and countries in which we already have close partnership—China, India, Pakistan and Iran—and certainly our CIS partners...”2 Initially, though, the project would be more narrowly focused: “we, along with our Chinese colleagues, are planning to start official talks on the formation of a comprehensive trade and economic partnership in Eurasia with the participation of European Union states and China. I expect that this will become one of the first steps toward the formation of a major Eurasian partnership.”3 1. M. Kaczmarski, “Non-Western Visions of Regionalism: China’s New Silk Road and Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union”, International Affairs (UK), Vol. 93, No. 6, 2017, p. 1373. 2. “Plenary Session of St Petersburg International Economic Forum”, 17 June 2016, President of Russia, available at: http://en.kremlin.ru. 3. Ibid. Greater Eurasia: The Emperor's New Clothes… Bobo Lo Putin’s launch of the Greater Eurasia enterprise was unsurprisingly short on detail. Subsequent explanations, however, have shed little further light; indeed, they have added to the confusion. Some commentators believe the main purpose of Greater Eurasia is essentially regional: to give new life to a flagging EEU4 and position it as “the central unifying structure in the regional Eurasian integration network”.5 Such views are echoed by Chinese scholars who see Greater Eurasia, and the EEU, as a “logical continuation of Russia’s Soviet past”, and as an overtly geopolitical initiative aimed at “restoring the leading role of Russia [in Eurasia] as to how it was in [the] time of the USSR.”6 But for other observers, the remit of Greater Eurasia is more global than regional. Dmitri Trenin, Director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, writes of “the self-image of a lone, great power in a global world; outreach to Asian partners to create
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reigniting Growth in Central and Eastern Europe Eastern and Central in Growth Dawn:A New Reigniting
    McKinsey Global Institute McKinsey Global Institute A new dawn: ReignitingA new dawn: growth in Central and Eastern Europe December 2013 A new dawn: Reigniting growth in Central and Eastern Europe The McKinsey Global Institute The McKinsey Global Institute (MGI), the business and economics research arm of McKinsey & Company, was established in 1990 to develop a deeper understanding of the evolving global economy. MGI’s mission is to provide leaders in the commercial, public, and social sectors with the facts and insights on which to base management and policy decisions. MGI research combines the disciplines of economics and management, employing the analytical tools of economics with the insights of business leaders. Its “micro-to-macro” methodology examines microeconomic industry trends to better understand the broad macroeconomic forces affecting business strategy and public policy. MGI’s in-depth reports have covered more than 20 countries and 30 industries. Current research focuses on six themes: productivity and growth; the evolution of global financial markets; the economic impact of technology and innovation; natural resources; the future of work; and urbanisation. Recent reports have assessed job creation, resource productivity, cities of the future, and the impact of the Internet. The partners of McKinsey fund MGI’s research; it is not commissioned by any business, government, or other institution. For further information about MGI and to download reports, please visit www.mckinsey.com/mgi. McKinsey in Central and Eastern Europe McKinsey & Company opened its first offices in Central and Eastern Europe in the early 1990s, soon after the momentous democratic changes in the region. McKinsey played an active role in the region’s economic rebirth, working with governments, nonprofits, and cultural institutions, as well as leading business organisations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Advisability of High-Rise Construction in the City
    E3S Web of Conferences 33, 01037 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20183301037 HRC 2017 The advisability of high-rise construction in the city 1 2 3 Natalia Sergievskaya *, Tatyana Pokrovskaya and Natalya Vorontsova 1 Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, Yaroslavskoe shosse, 26, Moscow,129337, Russia 2 Moscow Polytechnic University, Bolshaya Semenovskaya str., 38, Moscow, 107023, Russia 3 Vyatka State University, Moskovskaya str., 36, Kirov, 610000, Russia Abstract. In this article there discusses the question of advisability high- rise construction, the reasons for its use, both positive and negative sides of it. On the one hand, a number of authors believe that it is difficult to avoid high-rise construction due to the limited areas in very large cities. On the other hand, a number of other authors draw attention to the problems associated with high-rise construction. The author of the article analyses examples of high-rise construction in several countries (UAE, Dubai "Burj Khalifa"; Japan "Tokyo Sky Tree"; United States of America, "Willis Tower"; Russia "Federation Tower") and proves the advisability of high-rise construction in the city. 1 Introduction Nowadays high-rise construction is becoming more and more actual in the world. This is due to the fact the urbanization urban space is increasing and there is also accelerated development of construction technologies and technology of engineering support of buildings. As it was considered in USSR and then in Russia, high-rise buildings have height of 75 m that is more 25 floors. As for other countries, high-rise buildings have height from 35 to 100 metres.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Asia in a Reconnecting Eurasia Kyrgyzstan’S Evolving Foreign Economic and Security Interests
    JUNE 2015 1616 Rhode Island Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036 202-887-0200 | www.csis.org Lanham • Boulder • New York • London 4501 Forbes Boulevard Lanham, MD 20706 301- 459- 3366 | www.rowman.com Central Asia in a Reconnecting Eurasia Kyrgyzstan’s Evolving Foreign Economic and Security Interests AUTHORS Andrew C. Kuchins Jeffrey Mankoff Oliver Backes A Report of the CSIS Russia and Eurasia Program ISBN 978-1-4422-4100-8 Ë|xHSLEOCy241008z v*:+:!:+:! Cover photo: Labusova Olga, Shutterstock.com. Blank Central Asia in a Reconnecting Eurasia Kyrgyzstan’s Evolving Foreign Economic and Security Interests AUTHORS Andrew C. Kuchins Jeffrey Mankoff Oliver Backes A Report of the CSIS Rus sia and Eurasia Program June 2015 Lanham • Boulder • New York • London 594-61689_ch00_3P.indd 1 5/7/15 10:33 AM hn hk io il sy SY eh ek About CSIS hn hk io il sy SY eh ek For over 50 years, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has worked to hn hk io il sy SY eh ek develop solutions to the world’s greatest policy challenges. ­Today, CSIS scholars are hn hk io il sy SY eh ek providing strategic insights and bipartisan policy solutions to help decisionmakers chart hn hk io il sy SY eh ek a course toward a better world. hn hk io il sy SY eh ek CSIS is a nonprofit or ga ni za tion headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Center’s 220 full- time staff and large network of affiliated scholars conduct research and analy sis and hn hk io il sy SY eh ek develop policy initiatives that look into the future and anticipate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Declines in Warming and Vegetation Greening Trends Over Pan-Arctic Tundra
    Remote Sens. 2013, 5, 4229-4254; doi:10.3390/rs5094229 OPEN ACCESS Remote Sensing ISSN 2072-4292 www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing Article Recent Declines in Warming and Vegetation Greening Trends over Pan-Arctic Tundra Uma S. Bhatt 1,*, Donald A. Walker 2, Martha K. Raynolds 2, Peter A. Bieniek 1,3, Howard E. Epstein 4, Josefino C. Comiso 5, Jorge E. Pinzon 6, Compton J. Tucker 6 and Igor V. Polyakov 3 1 Geophysical Institute, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, College of Natural Science and Mathematics, University of Alaska Fairbanks, 903 Koyukuk Dr., Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 2 Institute of Arctic Biology, Department of Biology and Wildlife, College of Natural Science and Mathematics, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, P.O. Box 757000, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA; E-Mails: [email protected] (D.A.W.); [email protected] (M.K.R.) 3 International Arctic Research Center, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, College of Natural Science and Mathematics, 930 Koyukuk Dr., Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 4 Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, 291 McCormick Rd., Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 5 Cryospheric Sciences Branch, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 614.1, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 6 Biospheric Science Branch, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 614.1, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA; E-Mails: [email protected] (J.E.P.); [email protected] (C.J.T.) * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-907-474-2662; Fax: +1-907-474-2473.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammadov Azerbaijan's Geopolitical Identity.Indd
    # 62 VALDAI PAPERS February 2017 www.valdaiclub.com AZERBAIJAN’S GEOPOLITICAL IDENTITY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE 21ST CENTURY CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS Farhad Mammadov About the author: Farhad Mammadov PhD in Philosophy, Director, Center for Strategic Studies under the President of Azerbaijan The views and opinions expressed in this Paper are those of the author and do not represent the views of the Valdai Discussion Club, unless explicitly stated otherwise. AZERBAIJAN’S GEOPOLITICAL IDENTITY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE 21ST CENTURY CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS The 21st century began with chaos in international relations, the growing multipolarity of the once unipolar world, and geographic determinism giving prominence to regional leaders, who are resisting unipolar projects and competing with each other in their geographical region. However, nation states have shown that they are still to be reckoned with. International organizations and transnational law enforcement agencies, which were created to fi ght transnational threats such as international terrorism, drug cartels and criminal organizations, have not increased their effi ciency. Nation states continue to shoulder the biggest burden of fi ghting the above threats. Globalization has stimulated integration and accelerated various global processes, but it has not made this world safer or more stable. The connection between national, regional and global security is growing stronger. The fact that transnational threats operate as a network has highlighted the importance of interaction between nation states in fi ghting these threats. But strained relations between the geopolitical power centers, contradictions between regional states and the revival of bloc mentality are hindering the civilized world from consolidating its resources.
    [Show full text]
  • From Africa to Eurasia * Early Dispersals Ofer Bar-Yosef! *, A
    Quaternary International 75 (2001) 19}28 From Africa to Eurasia * early dispersals Ofer Bar-Yosef! *, A. Belfer-Cohen" !Department of Anthropology, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA "Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University, Jerusalem 91905, Israel Abstract The dispersals of early hominins in the late Pliocene or early Pleistocene into Eurasia were essentially sporadic. Little geographic and temporal continuity is observed between the various dated archaeological contexts, and the lithic assemblages do not demonstrate a techno-morphological continuity. The archaeological evidence from 1.8 to 0.7 Ma indicates at least three waves of early migrations. The earliest sortie involved bearers of core-chopper industries sometime around 1.7}1.6 Ma. Early Acheulean producers followed possibly around 1.4 Ma. The third wave occurred sometime around 0.8 Ma, and is represented by Acheulean groups who manufactured numerous #ake cleavers. The geographic scope of each of these waves is not yet well known.The reasons for &why' early humans dispersed from Africa into Eurasia include the &push' of environmental change and relative &demographic pressure', as well as the opening of new niches. Humans may have gained their meat supplies either from carcasses or through active predation. The archaeological and fossil records demonstrate that Homo erectus was a successful species, and like other successful species it enlarged its geographic distribution at all costs. Even if the trigger for the initial dispersal of Homo erectus remains unknown or controversial, the success of the hominid occupation of the Eurasian habitats was not primarily facilitated by the availability of food, or the human #exibility in food procuring techniques, but by the absence of the zoonotic diseases that plagued and constrained hominins in their African &cradle of evolution'.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia's “Pivot to Asia”
    Russia’s “Pivot to Asia”: The Multilateral Dimension Stephen Blank STEPHEN BLANK is a Senior Fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council. He can be reached at <[email protected]>. NOTE: Sections of this working paper draw on Stephen Blank, “Russian Writers on the Decline of Russia in the Far East and the Rise of China,” Jamestown Foundation, Russia in Decline Project, September 13, 2016. Working Paper, June 28, 2017 – Stephen Blank EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This paper explores the opportunities and challenges that Russia has faced in its economic pivot to Asia and examines the potential roadblocks to its future integration with the region with special regard to multilateral Asian institutions. Main Argument Despite the challenges Russia faces, many Russian writers and officials continue to insist that the country is making visible strides forward in its so-called pivot to Asia. Russia’s ability to influence the many multilateral projects that pervade Asia from the Arctic to Southeast Asia and increase its role in them represents an “acid test” of whether or not proclamations of the correctness of Russian policy can stand up to scrutiny. Such scrutiny shows that Russia is failing to benefit from or participate in these projects. The one exception, the Eurasian Union, has become an economic disappointment to both Russia and its other members. Russia is actually steadily losing ground to China in the Arctic, Central Asia, and North Korea. Likewise, in Southeast Asia Moscow has promoted and signed many agreements with members of ASEAN, only to fail to implement them practically. Since Asia, as Moscow well knows, is the most dynamic sector of the global economy, this failure to reform at home and implement the developmental steps needed to compete in Asia can only presage negative geoeconomic and geopolitical consequences for Russia as it steadily becomes increasingly marginalized in the region despite its rhetoric and diplomatic activity.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 1 Demography and Health in Eastern Europe and Eurasia
    Working Paper Series on the Transition Countries No. 1 DEMOGRAPHY AND HEALTH IN EASTERN EUROPE AND EURASIA Ayo Heinegg Robyn Melzig James Pickett and Ron Sprout June 2005 Program Office Bureau for Europe & Eurasia U.S. Agency for International Development 1 Demography and Health in Eastern Europe and Eurasia Ayo Heinegg Academy for Educational Development Email: [email protected] Robyn Melzig U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington DC Email: [email protected] James Pickett U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington DC Email: [email protected] Ron Sprout U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington DC Email: [email protected] Abstract: Eastern Europe and Eurasia is the only region worldwide experiencing a contraction in population, which stems from both a natural decrease in the population (i.e., crude death rates exceeding crude birth rates) and emigration. The highest crude death rates in the world are found among the transition countries; so too the lowest fertility rates. This study analyzes these trends and attempts to assess some of the underlying health factors behind them. The report also examines the evidence regarding migration patterns, both political aspects (including trends in refugees and internally displaced persons) and economic aspects (including remittances, urbanization, and brain drain). 2 USAID/E&E/PO Working Paper Series on the Transition Countries September 2006 No.1 Demography and Health (June 2005) No.2 Education (October 2005) No.3 Economic Reforms, Democracy, and Growth (November 2005) No.4 Monitoring Country Progress in 2006 (September 2006) No.5 Domestic Disparities (forthcoming) No.6 Labor Markets (forthcoming) No.7 Global Economic Integration (forthcoming) The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in these working papers are entirely those of the authors.
    [Show full text]
  • Eurasia Asia & Oceania
    Segment Overview Asia & Eurasia Oceania u p. 28 u p. 20 Number of countries 7 4 1,551 ,296 1 1,245 1,218 1 16 14 Number of projects 1 3 In production 2 43 1 1 6 Under development 10 Preparation for development Under exploration (oil and gas reservoirs confirmed) Under exploration Other 466 Production/Reserves 367 Proved reserves (million boe) 214 201 195 210 207 191 Net production (thousand boed) 179 197 190 188 167 166 28 27 27 26 25 25 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 485,275 485,069 483,187 406,828 409,776 / 352,383 Net sales 299,599 281,623 Operating income 264,849 235,814 Net sales (¥ million) 191,070 178,225 Operating income (¥ million) 96,341 94,050 85,541 84,325 73,574 68,319 47,076 41,752 42,601 39,769 36,461 32,228 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 018 INPEX CORPORATION Annual Report 2015 Middle East Americas Japan & Africa u p. 32 u p. 36 u p. 30 6 7 1 Minami-Nagaoka 1 2 Gas Field 1 Naoetsu LNG 3 Terminal 9 7 1 16 10 Natural gas pipeline network (Approx. 1,400 km) etc. 783 857 636 4 Project Overview Project 583 518 505 174 168 169 158 163 155 138 135 132 130 126 117 74 68 65 40 36 30 29 30 27 28 20 25 25 21 21 21 17 18 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 524,528 520,835 500,033 621,513 421,184 357,343 354,136 350,735 333,213 303,819 243,113 205,572 129,522 120,268 118,937 ) 113,662 104,525 93,959 32,555 28,568 25,959 22,771 24,607 16,692 16,693 12,673 11,435 13,351 15,303 5,945 5,525 (7,646) (3,035) 1,028 (6,089) (5,518) ( 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 INPEX CORPORATION Annual Report 2015 019 Project Overview by Region Asia & Oceania In the Asia and Oceania region, INPEX holds participating interests in the Offshore Mahakam Block in Indonesia, which is contributing significantly to earnings, and the large-scale Ichthys and Abadi LNG projects, where development and preparatory development activities are under way.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia, China, and Usa in Central Asia.Indd
    VALDAI DISCUSSION CLUB REPORT www.valdaiclub.com RUSSIA, CHINA, AND USA IN CENTRAL ASIA: A BALANCE OF INTERESTS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COOPERATION Timofey Bordachev, Wan Qingsong, Andrew Small MOSCOW, SEPTEMBER 2016 Authors Timofey Bordachev Programme Director of the Foundation for Development and Support of the Valdai Discussion Club, Director of the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the National Research University – Higher School of Economics, Ph.D. in Political Science Andrew Small Senior Transatlantic Fellow, Asia program, German Marshall Fund of the United States Wan Qingsong Research Fellow of the Center for Russian Studies (the National Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences under the Ministry of Education of PRC), School of Advanced International and Area Studies at East China Normal University; Research Fellow of the Center for Co-development with Neighboring Countries (University - Based Think Tank of Shanghai); holds a Doctorate in Political Science The authors express their gratitude for assistance in preparing the report and selection of reference materials to Kazakova Anastasia, Research Assistant, Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the National Research University – Higher School of Economics. The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the Valdai Discussion Club, unless explicitly stated otherwise. Contents Introduction: The Challenge of Central Asia .........................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • The Other Europes
    133 The Journal of Belarusian Studies The Other Europes BY STEPHEN G F HALL* White, Stephen and Feklyunina, Valentina. Identities and Foreign Policies in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus: The Other Europes, Palgrave Macmillan: London and New York, 2014. 350 pp. ISBN: 9780333993613. How should we define Europe? What constitutes Europe? What is the relationship between the European Union (EU) and outside states that deem themselves European? What are the discourses of these states towards Europe and their position within it? These questions form the basis of Identities and Foreign Policies in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Whereas other studies perceived identity as a dichotomy, for instance between Westernisers and Slavophiles, this investigation changes identity perceptions, arguing that it should be considered a continuum. The study, in conjunction with organisations in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine on the part of White and Fekyulnina involved extensive research over a 20 year period to ascertain meanings of Europe and the Belarusian, Russian Ukrainian regimes place in and perceptions of Europe. Professor Stephen White needs no introduction. He has been Professor at the University of Glasgow since the early 1970s. He is mostly known for work on Russia, but he has written extensively on Belarus and Ukraine. When this study began Dr. Valenitna Fekyulnina was a research assistant at University of Glasgow, but in 2012 she moved to Newcastle University to become a lecturer in politics. As mentioned the study provides a number of questions. These can be summarised as what is Europe and where do Belarus, Russia and Ukraine fit in? The study is thematic; assessing what constitutes Europe and the European Union’s failure in only seeing itself as Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia and Eurasia Steven Pifer
    14 Russia and Eurasia Steven Pifer Russia for the past 4 years has been on an economic roll fueled by high energy prices. The Kremlin in parallel has pursued an increasingly assertive foreign policy, raising the prospect of a more contentious Russia that will challenge U.S. interests in the former Soviet space, Europe, and elsewhere. The challenges posed by a more assertive Russia will command greater time and attention from U.S. national security planners. It is not only a resurgent Russia that could test the United States in coming years, however. A frail, unstable Russian state is not in the U.S. interest. Russian weakness raises less obvious, but nevertheless serious, possible challenges. Demographic, societal, and economic trends within Russia have the potential, particularly in combination, to create strategic shocks over the next 10 to 30 years that would have major implications for U.S. national security interests. This chapter examines those trends and potential shocks and outlines implications for U.S. national security. The strategic shocks that trends within Russia could combine to produce include collapse of the Russian state, expansion to take in more ethnic Russians, revolution (leading to a lurch toward democracy or, more likely, to the right), playing the energy card, and a military/technical surprise. While these shocks each have a very low likelihood, any of them would pose critical implications and challenges for key U.S. security interests. This chapter also looks at possible shocks elsewhere in the former Soviet space: Islamic revolution in a Central Asian state and Georgian-Russian military conflict, with the latter being the most likely shock of those addressed.
    [Show full text]