EURASIAN INTEGRATION: EFFECTS ON CENTRAL ASIA VLADIMIR FEDORENKO 750 First St., NE, Suite 1125 Washington, DC 20002 [email protected] Phone: 202.660.4333 www.rethinkinstitute.org RETHINK PAPER 23 SEPTEMBER 2015 EURASIAN INTEGRATION: EFFECTS ON CENTRAL ASIA VLADIMIR FEDORENKO RETHINK PAPER 23 September 2015 Rethink Institute is an independent, not-for-profit, nonpartisan research institution devoted to deepen our understanding of contemporary political and cultural challenges facing communities and societies around the world, in realizing peace and justice, broadly defined. The Institute pursues this mission by facilitating research on public policies and civic initiatives centering on dispute resolution, peace building, dialogue development, and education. Toward these goals, the Institute sponsors rigorous research and analysis, supports visiting scholar programs, and organizes workshops and conferences. © Rethink Institute. All rights reserved ISBN: 978-1-938300-32-5 Printed in the USA Rethink Institute 750 First St., NE, Suite 1125 Washington, DC 20002 Phone: 202.660.4333 [email protected] This publication can be downloaded at no cost at www.rethinkinstitute.org CONTENTS 1 Summary 3 Introduction 3 History of Eurasian Integration 5 Stages of Eurasian Integration: From CIS to EAEU 6 Eurasian Economic Union 7 Kazakhstan 9 Kyrgyzstan: Abandoning a multilateral policy? 12 Tajikistan: Next in Line? 15 Uzbekistan 15 Turkmenistan 16 Regional Factors 16 Security 17 Political Implications and Practicality 18 The Role of Media 19 Conclusion: Duality in Eurasian Integration 22 About the Author Eurasian Integration: Effects on Central Asia 1 Summary Rapidly growing Eurasian integration has become one of the most interesting developments in the post-Soviet region due to its economic and geopolitical dimensions. A Russian-led Eurasian integration process, which has included Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan so far, aims to establish a mechanism of intergovernmental cooperation focusing predominantly on economic partnership. With the establishment of supranational institutions in collaboration with the post-Soviet republics, Russia aims to reestablish its influence, foster economic ties and strengthen trade relationships in the region. While some experts see Eurasian integration as an important historical development, others are completely skeptical about its effectiveness and even longevity. While the progress of Eurasian integration is predominantly based on economic dimensions, it also inevitably features social, political, and security dimensions. This study aims to elaborate on the effects of Eurasian integration on the Central Asian countries. For the land-locked economies of the Central Asian republics, regional economic cooperation and trade constitute an essential factor of sustainable growth. Therefore, any regional or international establishments like the Eurasian Economic Union that promote international trade and facilitate movement of goods, capital, labor and services between member states would be welcomed. If properly implemented, intra-union cooperation could strengthen local business and make them more competitive in global markets, attract foreign investments, strengthen the middle class, and eventually liberalize the economy. It could also facilitate adopting resolutions for a number of regional dilemmas such as border delimitation disputes, enclave problems in the Fergana Valley and transboundary water cooperation. However, there is concern that the initial purpose of Eurasian integration could shift from interstate cooperation toward the creation of a more intrusive supranational structure. Especially after the annexation of Crimea, the Ukrainian crisis and Western sanctions, Russia has adopted more aggressive and persistent behavior that could damage trust among the members of the Eurasian Economic Union. In fact, Astana feels the necessity of making periodic announcement that Kazakhstan does not seek and will not accept any political integration or supranational structure. If mechanisms for equality and regulation become instruments of political and economic pressure, the Economic Union will lose its attractiveness as a union that could otherwise be mutually beneficial for all member countries. 2 Vladimir Fedorenko Eurasian Integration: Effects on Central Asia 3 Introduction Rapidly growing Eurasian integration has become one of the most interesting developments in the post-Soviet region due to its economic and geopolitical dimensions. A Russian-led Eurasian integration process, which has included Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan so far, aims to establish a mechanism of intergovernmental cooperation focusing predominantly on economic partnership. With the establishment of supranational institutions in collaboration with the post-Soviet republics, Russia aims to reestablish its influence, foster economic ties and strengthen trade relationships in the region. While some experts see Eurasian integration as an important historical development, others are completely skeptical about its effectiveness and even longevity. Eurasian integration has been perceived differently internationally. The United States sees Russian-led integration as the Kremlin’s imperial ambition to ‘re-Sovietize’ some of the former Soviet states by creating supranational structures that would eventually take control over not only economic issues but also political decision-making mechanisms. In 2012, former U.S. secretary of state Hillary Clinton said, “We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it [Eurasian Union].”1 China, another interested state, interprets Eurasian integration as Moscow’s instrument for increasing Russian competitiveness in trade and securing access to Central Asia by setting up structural barriers to hinder Chinese competitiveness. While the progress of Eurasian integration is predominantly based on economic dimensions, it also inevitably features social, political, and security dimensions. This study aims to elaborate on the effects of Eurasian integration on the Central Asian countries. History of Eurasian Integration To create intergovernmental partnership among post-Soviet states, Russia needed a new ideology that could provide fresh momentum and keep new members together. In the early 1990s the Yeltsin administration failed to implement Western democracy and liberal values, while shock therapy did not result in the desired outcomes. Unwilling to continue a Western path of development, Russia did not want to return to the Soviet experience, either. This led to disappointment and the need to forge a new ideology of regional development. This created favorable conditions for the development of Neo-Eurasianism and acceptance of this doctrine as a national ideology. Ideas about Russia’s uniqueness and belonging to neither Europe nor Asia were common during Imperial Russia. Prominent Russian philosopher Petr Chaadaev (1794 - 1856) said, “We do not belong to any of the great families of the human race; we are neither of the West nor of the East, and we don’t have the traditions of either.”2 Such ideas and ways of thinking were inspirational in rethinking and redefining Russia’s role and identity. 1 Clover, Charles. “Clinton Vows to Thwart New Soviet Union,” December 6, 2012. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a5b15b14-3fcf-11e2-9f71-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3iHp5ES94. 2 Marlene Laruelle, Russian Eurasianism: An Ideology of Empire (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 2012) p. 3. 4 Vladimir Fedorenko Classical Eurasianism as an ideology developed in the early 20th century among Russian émigrés and later continued under the Soviet regime. The key concept of Eurasianism is based on Russia’s unique position at the confluence of various regional cultures and identities, such as Slavic, Turkic, Islamic, Turanian and Arian. According to classical Eurasianism, the Eurasian identity was based more on Asian than Western characteristics. Moreover, Eurasianism sees Russia positioned at the center, rejecting the perception of Russia as being on the periphery of Europe.3 Nikolai Trubetzkoy, Petr Savitsky and Lev Gumilev were the most influential thinkers in the discourses of Eurasianism. While Gumilev didn’t identify himself as a Eurasianist, he was perceived and often described as a Eurasianist in the Russian media. For example, Gumilev declared, “I agree with the main historical and methodological conclusions of Eurasianists. But they had no knowledge of the key element in the theory of ethnogenesis: the concept of passionarity4. They lacked a background in natural science.”5 Moreover, Gumilev’s approach was also based more on the principal of ethnic essences, while classic Eurasianism was attached to “geographic ideology,” believing that territory gives meaning to national identity.6 Various references and understanding of the key elements forming Eurasia, such as language, ethnicity and territory, enabled formation of the discourses and interpretation of Eurasian identity and inclusive in-group affiliation. Neo-Eurasianism originated in the 1990s and slowly gained popularity because it could fill the ideological vacuum in Russian foreign policy. The Neo-Eurasian school of thought considers Russia to be closer to Asia than to Europe. Aleksandr Panarin and Alexander Dugin are among the most prominent scholars who promoted Neo-Eurasianism as the only way for Russia to reclaim its international significance and strength. Dugin believes that there