Eurasianism, Eurasian Economic Union and Multipolarity: Assessments of Foreign Experts
- 作者: Bazavluk S.V.1, Kurylev K.P.1, Savin L.V.2
-
隶属关系:
- Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)
- Fund for Monitoring and Forecasting the Development of Cultural and Territorial Spaces
- 期: 卷 22, 编号 1 (2022): Eurasian Ideology and Eurasian Integration
- 页面: 30-42
- 栏目: THEMATIC DOSSIER
- URL: https://journals.rudn.ru/international-relations/article/view/30677
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-0660-2022-22-1-30-42
如何引用文章
详细
Eurasianism, in its various interpretations, from ideology to the implementation of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) programs, is regarded as one of the strategies of creating a multipolar world order. This article analyzes the views and assessments of foreign authors regarding the relationship between Eurasianism and the EAEU amid the changing international context. The authors present both critical and positive opinions on Eurasianism, Eurasian integration and its political and economic interlinkages with other countries and associations (China, Vietnam, the European Union (EU), Latin America). Thus, we identify three main lines of assessments on Eurasianism and Eurasian integration. The first includes negative assessments ranging from characterizing Eurasianism and the EAEU as a threat to the EU, the US, and the West in general to deliberate misinformation about the Eurasian ideology, for instance, denoting Eurasianism as “parafascism.” The second comprises more pragmatic and balanced views, with an emphasis on economic cooperation, which may imply cooperation with the EAEU and acceptance of the Eurasian integration if specific conditions are met, or cessation of such cooperation. The third group includes positive assessments and emphasizes the need for more intensive interaction between the EAEU and the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative. Such views are generally held by Russian and Chinese authors. Non-Russian conceptions of Eurasianism that gained popularity in Turkey or Kazakhstan are ideologically close to the classic Eurasianism and the EAEU, although these conceptions take a distinctive national shape. The article provides some examples of interregional cooperation promoted by the EAEU within the BRICS under the “outreach” model, i.e., adding new dimensions to existing cooperation formats. The authors arrive at a conclusion that most often the assessments of Eurasian integration and cooperation proposals by foreign experts are tied to Russian foreign policy (or experts’ opinion of it). They often find interconnections between EAEU, Eurasianism and Russian policy, which emphasize Russian identity as a marker of distinctive civilization. The article also notes comments of Russian authors on the EAEU - EU relations. The research is based on comparative analysis of analytical and research publications on the subject.
作者简介
Sergei Bazavluk
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)
Email: bazavluk-sv@rudn.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9739-2594
Senior Lecturer, Department of Theory and History of International Relations
Moscow, Russian FederationKonstantin Kurylev
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)
Email: kurylev-kp@rudn.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3075-915X
PhD, Dr. of Sc. (History), Professor, Department of Theory and History of International Relations
Moscow, Russian FederationLeonid Savin
Fund for Monitoring and Forecasting the Development of Cultural and Territorial Spaces
编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: editor@monitorfund.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0109-4200
Director
Moscow, Russian Federation参考
- Bazavluk, S. V. (2018). Eurasianism: Terminological ambivalence. Vestnik RUDN. International Relations, 18(2), 273-283. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-0660-2018-18-2-273-283
- Bazavluk, S. V., Kurylev, K. P., Savin, L. V., & Stanis, D. V. (2021). Eurasian ideology and political processes. Information Wars, (1), 59-64. (In Russian).
- Fatykhova, V. M. (2019). Eurasian cooperation in science and higher education: Prospects of neofunctional “spillovers”. MGIMO Review of International Relations, (2), 159-175. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2019-2-65-159-175
- Ferguson, R. J. (2018) China’s Eurasian dilemmas: Roads and risks for a sustainable global power. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Glazyev, S. Y., Chuschkin, V. I., & Tkachuk, S. P. (2013). European Union and Eurasian Economic community: Similarities and differences of the processes of integration building. Мoscow: Viktor Media publ. (In Russian).
- Gresh, G. (Ed.). (2018). Eurasia’s maritime rise and global security: From the Indian Ocean to Pacific Asia and the Arctic. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Isaev, I. (1994). Eurasianism: Ideolofy of the etatism. Social Sciences and Contemporary World, (5), 42-55. (In Russian).
- Izotov, V. S. (2020). Regional integration: From classic to post-Modern. New forms of linking and out-reach cooperation as tools of the multipolar architecture. In T. A. Meshkova (Ed.), In search of new architecture of multipolarity: International cooperation of the EAEU (pp. 21-29). Moscow: Izdatel’skii dom Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki publ. (In Russian).
- Kefeli, I. F., & Shcevchenko, N. N. (2018). Big Eurasia: Civilizational space, uniting ideology, projecting future. Saint-Petersburg: ID “Petropolis”, ООО “Geopolitika i Bezopasnost” publ. (In Russian).
- Laruelle, M. (2020). Accusing Russia of fascism. Russia in Global Affairs, (4), 100-123. https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6374-2020-18-4-100-123
- Laruelle, М. (2008). Russian Eurasianism: An ideology of empire. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
- Libman, A., & Obydenkova, A. (2020). Global governance and Eurasian international organisations: Lessons learned and future agenda. Post-Communist Economies, 33(2-3), 359-377. https://doi.org/10.1080/14631377.2020.1793587
- Mostafa, G. (2013). The concept of ‘Eurasia’: Kazakhstan’s Eurasian policy and its implications. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 4(2), 160-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2013.03.006
- Pirker, B., & Entin, K. (2020). The free movement of persons in the Eurasian Economic Union - between Civis Eurasiaticus and Homo Oeconomicus. In N. Cambien, E. Kochenov & E. Muir (Eds.), European citizenship under stress: Social justice, Brexit and other challenges (pp. 508-523). Leiden: Brill.
- Serbin, A. (2020). Eurasia y América Latina en un mundo multipolar. Barcelona, Buenos Aires: Icaria Editorial - CRIES.
- Suyunchev, М. М., Repetyuk, S. V., Fain, B. I., & Tregubova, E. A. (2020). Development of the approach for common market organization of electricity energy of the Eurasian Economic Union (ЕАEU). Мoscow: RANKhiGS publ. (In Russian).
- Tsvyk, A. V. (2018). ‘Greater Europe’ or ‘Greater Eurasia’? In search of new ideas for the Eurasian integration. RUDN Journal of Sociology, 18(2), 262-270. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2272-2018-18-2-262-270
- Ushkalova, D. I. (2017). Integration models of the Eurasian Economic Union and free trade zone of the CIS in the context of international experience. Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk (The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences), (6), 100-111. (In Russian).
- Vasilieva, N. А., & Lagutina, М. L. (2013). Eurasian Economic unit project by experts’ evaluations. International Organizations Research Journal, 8(4), 229-242. (In Russian).
- Yakovets, Y. V. (2018). Greater Eurasian partnership - civilizational megaproject. In Greater Eurasian Partnership: Past, present, future: selected works of the Х Eurasian scientific forum, Vol. 1 (pp. 397-408). Saint-Petersburg: Sankt-Peterburgskii nauchnyi tsentr RAN publ. (In Russian).
- Yongquan, L. (2018). The greater Eurasian partnership and the Belt and Road Initiative: Can the two be linked? Journal of Eurasian Studies, 9(2), 94-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2018.07.004
- Zamaraeva, E. I. (2016). Nation and nationalism in the philosophy of Eurasianism. The Journal “Solovyov Studies”, (4), 150-162. (In Russian).