DOCSLIB.ORG

Russia, China, and Usa in Central Asia.Indd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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 The Interests of the Parties ....................................................................................................................................5 Areas of Cooperation............................................................................................................................................. 14 RUSSIA, CHINA, AND USA IN CENTRAL ASIA: A BALANCE OF INTERESTS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COOPERATION The extent and potential for confrontation between the major powers is signifi cantly lower in Central Asia than in the Asia-Pacifi c region (APR), Eastern Europe or the Middle East. The potential for cooperation is greater because Russia, China, and especially the United States have no vital need to dominate in the region. Therefore, none of these three powers will unleash a war against the others for the sake of Central Asia – as compared to Europe or Southeast Asia, for example. This fact alone could serve as a powerful resource for the development of trilateral cooperation that could become deep and substantive, or remain non-binding in character. Introduction: The Challenge of Central Asia At first glance, cooperation between will try to create a new “caliphate” in Central the U.S., China, and Russia for maintaining Asia – especially because, according to experts, security in Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, it is safer for them to operate in that region than Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) in North Africa. Tensions are already escalating might seem to have little chance of success. significantly in the Central Asian areas that However, the authors of this report believe border Afghanistan. that Washington, Moscow, and Beijing hold Despite the significant progress that signifi cant resources for cooperating to provide the existing regimes have achieved in stabilizing elements of regional security in Central Asia. the Central Asian “fi ve” (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, At the same time, these resources come with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) obvious limitations. Maximum effort should following the collapse of the Soviet Union, go toward advancing the common good so that the current prospects for those states to achieve confrontation does not dominate the agenda. internal stability are increasingly uncertain. To reduce the potential for confl ict as much as Outside observers see no clear mechanism possible, the three major powers would do well for the transfer of power after the ruling to explore thoroughly the potential areas and “patriarchs” in Astana and Tashkent inevitably opportunities available to them for cooperation. leave the scene due to natural causes. Even The Central Asian region the internal stability that does exist suffers is a growing concern to its neighbors and occasional setbacks by outbursts of violence, to major non-regional players. It borders one as happened, for example, in early June of this of the most dangerous hotbeds of radicalism year in the Kazakh city of Aktobe, and in July today – Afghanistan, whose territory is also in the former capital of Kazakhstan, Alma-Ata. home to a signifi cant number of ethnic Tajiks Having gained independence and and Uzbeks. It is very possible that, after their sovereignty after the collapse of the Soviet inevitable defeat in the Middle East, Islamic State1 Union, the countries of Central Asia (CA) became full-fl edged participants in international relations. However, they are still working 1 Banned in Russia. – Ed. note. VALDAI DISCUSSION CLUB REPORT, SEPTEMBER 2016 3 RUSSIA, CHINA, AND USA IN CENTRAL ASIA: A BALANCE OF INTERESTS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COOPERATION to achieve self-suffi ciency in terms of socio- it introduced its “Neighborhood Policy,” economic and institutional development, and a Euro-centric integrative entity aimed at in maintaining internal political stability and stabilizing its neighbors by encouraging them state integrity. The interests of the outside actors to adopt EU institutional practices and norms. overlap to a remarkable degree in this respect. In other words, this project could transform In particular, China, Russia, and the United its participants and provide them with further States, despite their “history of relations” preferences on the condition that they fulfi lled with CA, are essentially interested a certain set of criteria. By contrast, Russia and in the same thing – preventing the region China do not seek to transform, but to stabilize from becoming another hotbed of global the political regimes in Central Eurasia, to freeze instability. The U.S. is most interested in how the situation there as much as possible, and for these issues play out in the global context, as long as possible. whereas Russia and China focus more on their Thus, Russia and China are more likely regional signifi cance and the potential problems to choose a paradigm for cooperation in Central that can extend across borders. Asian, at least on paper, if not in practice. The fact that both Russia and China Moreover, efforts to stabilize the region could want to prevent current or future instability become a unifying factor for Russia and China in Kazakhstan and the rest of Central Asia from in the overall global context and could lead spreading into their territories makes it logical to a sort of “proto-alliance” between them2. At that they look for ways to cooperate rather the same time, of course no one can drag China than compete. Potential instability in Central into Central Asia against its will. It is important Eurasia is a sort of “perfect common challenge” to examine the actual conditions that exist for that Russia and China can resolve only with both powers to cooperate with the U.S., and with a rational, positive sum game. The geographic other non-regional players. proximity of this potentially explosive region Multilateral cooperation in the region is an important consideration for both major should in no way prompt China to view powers. Kazakhstan and Central Asia directly the process as “strategic encirclement.” Under border China’s troubled problem-plagued no circumstances would Russia invite non- Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region as well as regional players into Central Asia. However, Russia’s vitally important Urals and Central Moscow should help to ensure that the real Siberian regions. Both powers realize that, potential and diplomatic maneuverings of those if the situation were to deteriorate, they could outside powers contribute to regional stability not simply foist problems onto the other party, and to responsible behavior on the part but would have to cooperate “on the spot.” of the regional elite. It is good to see that these Russia and China have a variety elite now conduct themselves like important of formats for cooperation they can offer and responsible partners, and it is necessary to neighboring Central Asian countries to support them on this path. looking to improve internal stability. Consider The United States is unquestionably the counter-example of efforts by the European the most important non-regional player Union to stabilize its own periphery. After 2 the EU expanded successfully in 2004–2007, See Valdai paper #50 “Russia and China in Central Asia: the great win-win game”, author – T. Bordachev. 4 VALDAI DISCUSSION CLUB REPORT, SEPTEMBER 2016 RUSSIA, CHINA, AND USA IN CENTRAL ASIA: A BALANCE OF INTERESTS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COOPERATION in Central Asia and it is diffi cult to determine especially because Washington continues the potentially positive contribution that to hold signifi cant infl uence in Central Asian it could make to security in Central Asia. capitals – although observers believe that Signs have appeared that U.S. policy seeks infl uence is diminishing. to accentuate possible elements of mistrust This paper aims to study the basic between Moscow and Beijing on issues related approaches of the three powers, identify areas to Central Asia. At the same time, some Russian
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • GLOBAL PROBLEMS for GLOBAL GOVERNANCE Valdai Discussion Club Grantees Report
    Moscow, September 2014 valdaiclub.com GLOBAL PROBLEMS FOR GLOBAL GOVERNANCE Valdai Discussion Club Grantees Report Global Problems for Global Governance Valdai Discussion Club Grantees Report Moscow, September 2014 valdaiclub.com Authors This report was prepared within the framework of the Research Grants Alexander Konkov Program of the Foundation for (Russian Federation) Development and Support of the Valdai PhD in Political Science. Head of the Discussion Club. International Peer Review at the Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian The views and opinions of authors Federation, member of the Peer Сouncil at expressed herein do not necessarily state the Institute for Socio-Economic and Political or reflect those of the Valdai Discussion Research, visiting lecturer at the Moscow State Club, neither of any organizations University and at the Financial University the authors have been affiliated under the Government of the Russian with or may be affiliated in future. Federation, member of the board at the Russian Political Science Association The paper had been prepared by the authors before the outbreak Hovhannes Nikoghosyan of the Ukrainian crisis, and therefore (Armenia) the text of the report does not contain PhD in Political Science, visiting lecturer at any analysis of the events. the Russian-Armenian (Slavonic) University (Yerevan), research fellow at the Information and Public Relations Centre under the Administration of the President of Armenia (2010-2012), visiting scholar at Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University (2012–2013) ISBN 978-5-906757-09-8 Contents 4 Introduction 8 Chapter 1. Russia in Global World 24 Chapter 2. Global Trends of Global Governance 24 2.1.
    [Show full text]
  • V. Inozemtsev, “Russia's Economic Modernization: the Causes of A
    Notes de l’Ifri Russie.Nei.Visions 96 Russia’s Economic Modernization: The Causes of a Failure Vladislav INOZEMTSEV September 2016 Russia/NEI 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. With offices in Paris and Brussels, Ifri stands out as one of the few French think tanks to have positioned itself at the very heart of European and broader international debate. The opinions expressed in this text are the responsibility of the author alone. ISBN: 978-2-36567-616-8 © All rights reserved, Ifri, 2016 Cover: © Philippe Agaponov How to quote this document: Vladislav Inozemtsev, “Russia's Economic Modernization: The Causes of a Failure”, Russie.Nei.Visions, No. 96, September 2016. 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] Ifri-Bruxelles Rue Marie-Thérèse, 21 1000 – Brussels – BELGIUM Tel.: +32 (0)2 238 51 10 – Fax : +32 (0)2 238 51 15 Email: [email protected] Website: Ifri.org Russie.Nei.Visions Russie.Nei.Visions is an online collection dedicated to Russia and the other new independent states (Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan).
    [Show full text]
  • The 2020 Nagorno Karabakh Conflict from Iran's Perspective
    INSTITUTE FOR SECURITY POLICY (ISP) WORKING PAPER THE 2020 NAGORNO - KARABAKH CONFLICT FROM IRAN’S PERSPECTIVE by Vali KALEJI Center for Strategic Studies (CSS) The COVID-19 pandemic: impact for the post-Soviet space and Russia’s aspirations VIENNA 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 3 II. CURRENT FLOW OF WAR IN NAGORNO-KARABAKH: SECURITY CONCERNS IN IRAN'S NORTHWESTERN BORDERS ................................................................................................................................. 5 III. IRAN SECURITY AND MILITARY REACTIONS .......................................................................................... 13 IV. IRAN’S DIPLOMATIC DYNAMISM ............................................................................................................. 17 V. ANALYZING IRAN’S FOREIGN POLICY TOWARD THE 2020 NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT ....... 26 VI. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................. 29 1 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Dr. Vali Kaleji is an expert on Central Asia and Caucasian Studies in Tehran, Iran. His recent publications in Persian: The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO): Goals, Functions and Perspectives (2010), South Caucasus as a Regional Security Complex, (2014), Political Developments in the Republic of Armenia, 1988- 2013 (2014), Iran, Russia and China in
    [Show full text]
  • Valdai Club Report the International Dimension of the Nagorno
    Valdai Discussion Club Report The Breakdown of the Status Quo and the International Dimension of the Nagorno-Karabakh Crisis Kerim Has, Vali Kaleji, Sergey Markedonov valdaiclub.com #valdaiclub December 2020 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. ISBN 978-5-907318-18-2 © The Foundation for Development and Support of the Valdai Discussion Club, 2020 42 Bolshaya Tatarskaya st., Moscow, 115184, Russia About the Authors Kerim Has Expert on International and Russia-Turkey Relations (Turkey) Vali Kaleji PhD in Regional Studies, Central Asia and Caucasian Studies, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran and analyst at the Institute for Iranian and Eurasian Studies (IRAS) (Iran) Sergey Markedonov Leading Researcher at the Institute for International Studies, MGIMO University; Editor-in-Chief of the Journal “International Analytics” (Russia) Contents 3 The Internationalisation of the Nagorno-Karabakh Regional Confl ict 6 The Breakdown of the Old Status Quo: New Challenges 9 Turkey: Old Interests, New Role 12 Iran: A Policy of Careful Balance Iran’s position towards the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh confl ict Iran’s security and military reactions Iran diplomatic dynamisms 20 Georgia: Fragile Neutrality 22 Russia, the United States and France: Results of the Stress Test Moscow between Baku, Yerevan and Ankara US: Nagorno-Karabakh against the background of the election campaign France: the Mediterranean, European leadership and internal unity through the Nagorno-Karabakh prism Big deals or pragmatism? Potential scenarios The Breakdown of the Status Quo and the International Dimension of the Nagorno-Karabakh Crisis 3 The Internationalisation of the Nagorno-Karabakh Regional Confl ict An Armenian-Azerbaijani confrontation is nothing new in international politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia's Foreign Policy: the Internal
    RUSSIA’S FOREIGN POLICY FOREIGN RUSSIA’S XXXXXXXX Andemus, cont? Giliis. Fertus por aciendam ponclem is at ISPI. omantem atuidic estius, nos modiertimiu consulabus RUSSIA’S FOREIGN POLICY: vivissulin voctum lissede fenducient. Andius isupio uratient. THE INTERNAL- Founded in 1934, ISPI is Actu sis me inatquam te te te, consulvit rei firiam atque a an independent think tank committed to the study of catis. Benterri er prarivitea nit; ipiesse stiliis aucto esceps, INTERNATIONAL LINK international political and Catuit depse huiumum peris, et esupimur, omnerobus economic dynamics. coneque nocuperem moves es vesimus. edited by Aldo Ferrari and Eleonora Tafuro Ambrosetti It is the only Italian Institute Iter ponsultorem, ursultorei contern ultortum di sid C. Marbi introduction by Paolo Magri – and one of the very few in silictemqui publint, Ti. Teatquit, videst auderfe ndiissendam Europe – to combine research Romnesidem simaximium intimus, ut et; eto te adhui activities with a significant publius conlostam sultusquit vid Cate facteri oriciamdi, commitment to training, events, ompec morterei iam pracion tum mo habem vitus pat veri and global risk analysis for senaributem apecultum forte hicie convo, que tris. Serum companies and institutions. pra intin tant. ISPI favours an interdisciplinary Bonertum inatum et rem sus ilicaedemus vid con tum and policy-oriented approach made possible by a research aur, conenit non se facia movere pareis, vo, vistelis re, crei team of over 50 analysts and terae movenenit L. Um prox noximod neritiam adeffrestod an international network of 70 comnit. Mulvis Ahacciverte confenit vat. Romnihilii issedem universities, think tanks, and acchuiu scenimi liescipio vistum det; hacrurorum, et, research centres.
    [Show full text]
  • TOWARD the GREAT OCEAN, OR the NEW GLOBALIZATION of RUSSIA Valdai Discussion Club Analytical Report
    Moscow, JuLY, 2012 valdaiclub.com TOWARD THE GREAT OCEAN, OR THE NEW GLOBALIZATION OF RUSSIA Valdai Discussion Club Analytical Report Toward the Great Ocean, or the New Globalization of Russia Valdai Discussion Club analytical report Moscow, July, 2012 valdaiclub.com Head of the research group and executive editor: Sergei Karaganov, Chairman of the Presidium of the Council for Foreign and Defense Policy and Chairman of the Valdai Discussion Club Authors: Oleg Barabanov, Professor at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations under the Russian Foreign Ministry Timofei Bordachev, Director of Research Programs at the Council for Foreign and Defense Policy Contents 5 Introduction: A New Global Agenda 8 Chapter 1. Asia as a Challenge and an Opportunity 20 Chapter 2. From a European Power to a Globalized Power Research background and acknowledgments This paper is based on the analytical report Asian Vector prepared by the National Research University – Higher School of Economics in 2010; abstracts from Through Harmonious Development to Regional Stability: Russia and China in a New Global Architecture prepared by the Asian Section of the Valdai Discussion Club in 2010; abstracts from To the Great Ocean: Russia and Asia, or Russia in Asia? prepared by the Asian Section of the Valdai Discussion Club in 2011; the reports Russia as a Euro-Pacific Power: New Trends in Asian Regional Architecture and the Role of Russia and Korean Peninsula: Challenges and Opportunities for Russia prepared by the Russian World Foundation; and a number of
    [Show full text]
  • Toward the Great Ocean—2, Or Russia's Breakthrough to Asia
    Moscow, February 2014 valdaiclub.com Toward the Great Ocean—2, or Russia’s Breakthrough to Asia Valdai Discussion Club Report Toward the Great Ocean—2, or Russia’s Breakthrough to Asia Valdai Discussion Club Report Moscow, February 2014 valdaiclub.com Executive Editor and Head Authors of the Authors’ Group Igor Makarov Sergei Karaganov principal author, lecturer at the Department of Dean of the Faculty of World Economy World Economy, National Research University and International Affairs at the National Higher School of Economics; Research University — Higher School of Ph.D. in Economics Economics; Honorary Chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Oleg Barabanov Defense Policy (CFDP); D.Sc. in History Head of the Department of Policy and Functioning of the European Union and the European Council, Moscow State Institute of International Relations; professor at the Project scientific supervisors Department of International Affairs, National Research University — Higher School of Sergei Karaganov Economics; D.Sc. in Political Science Dean of the Faculty of World Economy and International Affairs at the National Timofei Bordachev Research University — Higher School of Director of the Center for Comprehensive Economics; Honorary Chairman of the European and International Studies, National Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Research University — Higher School of Defense Policy (CFDP); D.Sc. in History Economics; Ph.D. in Political Science Victor Larin Evgeny Kanaev Director of the Institute of History, professor at the Department of International Archaeology and Ethnography of the Affairs, National Research University — Higher Peoples of the Far East, Far Eastern School of Economics; D.Sc. in History Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; D.Sc.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia, Asia Centrale E Caucaso Alessio Stilo
    Russia, Asia centrale e Caucaso Alessio Stilo Il Valdai Club 2019 e le aspirazioni russe da potenza globale Uno degli eventi-chiave per comprendere i lineamenti della politica estera russa del nuovo millennio è il Valdai Discussion Club, un forum di discussione annuale fondato nel 2004 che è stato descritto come “l’equivalente russo del Forum di Davos”1 (ma anche “il Bilderberg di Vladimir Putin”2) e la cui sessione del 2019 ha avuto luogo a Sochi dal 30 settembre al 3 ottobre scorso. Nel 2011 è stata creata la Foundation for Development and Support of the Valdai Discussion Club, entità sotto la supervisione congiunta del Council on Foreign and Defence Policy (CFDP), del Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), del Moscow State Institute of International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (MGIMO University) e della National Research University Higher School of Economics al fine di espandere le attività del Forum in nuove aree, tra cui ricerca e lavoro di sensibilizzazione, programmi regionali e tematici. Nel 2014, la Valdai Foundation ha assunto in toto la gestione di tutti i progetti del Valdai Club, trasformandolo in un vero e proprio think tank strutturato, al punto da svolgere sessioni autonome presso il Forum Economico Internazionale di San Pietroburgo e presso il Forum Economico Orientale di Vladivostok, per il quale ha contribuito a predisporre il programma commerciale. In tal modo il Valdai Club, che in origine fungeva da strumento per “raccontare la Russia al mondo”, è diventato una piattaforma stabile orientata a influenzare l’agenda globale e fornire una valutazione qualificata sulle questioni geopolitiche e geoeconomiche, promuovendo “il dialogo tra le élite intellettuali globali3 al fine di trovare soluzioni per superare le crisi del sistema internazionale”4.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia's Challenge to the Existing Global Order in His Speeches to the Valdai Discussion Club Three Years Running in Fall 2014
    Russia’s Challenge to the Existing Global Order Dr. Roger E. Kanet, Professor of Political Science, University of Miami In his speeches to the Valdai Discussion Club three years running in fall 2014 through 2016 (Valdai 2014, 2015, 2016), President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation reiterated Russia’s refusal to accept as legitimate the post-Cold War international order. In his view that order is simply a set of rules imposed by the West – to its advantage – that the United States and other Western states themselves often do not follow. For Russia, global order should be based on a multipolar system in which a Westphalian sense of absolute sovereignty prevails; the rules for international economic intercourse cannot continue to preference the West and legitimacy must be based on a system that empowers Russia and other emerging state actors. In other words, Russia continues to challenge the West-centric order that emerged after the collapse of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), as its rhetoric and, especially, its actions over the past decade have increasingly made clear (Bodganov 2017). After a short hiatus following the collapse of the USSR, when Russia’s new leadership was apparently committed to joining the West and its institutions, this view of Russia and its place in the world has come to dominate the ruling political elite ever since Vladimir Putin emerged as president at the turn of the century. Russian policy veered away from its short-lived collaborative Western orientation to a unilateralist approach based on the idea that Russia was not fully part of Europe or the West, but rather was a Eurasian state with its own culture and interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia's Search for a Greater Eurasia
    KENNAN CABLE No. 40 l February 2019 President Atambayev (Kyrgyzstan), President Nazarbayev (Kazakhstan), President Putin (Russia), President Lukashenko (Belarus), and President Sargsyan (Armenia) after a meeting of the Eurasian Economic Union in Moscow in 2014. Photograph: Reuters Russia’s Search for a Greater Eurasia: Origins, Promises, and Prospects Seçkin Köstem Vladimir Putin announced the Russian government’s Russia’s geo-economic projects are always linked to desire for a greater Eurasian partnership at the St. its status in international politics, and the search for Petersburg Economic Forum in June 2016. In the a Greater Eurasia demonstrates that for the Kremlin, opening speech, Putin proposed “considering the foreign economic strategy and international identity prospects for more extensive Eurasian partnership are inherently linked. While Russian leadership is well involving the Eurasian Economic Union,” in which aware of the shifts in the global economy, it is also countries such as China, Pakistan, Iran, and India would entrapped by its great power nationalism in designing also be included.1 Since then, Putin has consistently and implementing its strategy. With its grand name, promoted the project in his addresses to the Federal the Greater Eurasian Partnership is no exception; the Assembly, in meetings with foreign leaders, at Kremlin acknowledges the strategic importance of Asia subsequent St. Petersburg Economic Forums, and at but does not have the economic and political means to the Eastern Economic Forums held in Vladivostok. achieve its goals. KENNAN CABLE No. 40 l February 2019 Origins and Promises of Greater and Russia, as well as by Belarus and the Silk Road Economic Belt project.”3 The report put emphasis on Eurasian Partnership the modernizing role of Eurasian integration for the Russia initially aimed to integrate into Europe as Russian economy.
    [Show full text]