NeutralCitizen
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 4,217
- Reaction score
- 0
At the Astana Economic Forum, held on May 22-24 in Kazakhstan, one of the key topics was the process of Eurasian economic integration. It should be noted that the Eurasian Union (EAU) has been the subject of lively debate over the last few months in media and backstage at various expert events. Indeed, the new trend toward integration on the continent may change the balance of power in Eurasia. Still, the topic raises many questions.
First of all, we should understand that although the idea of the partial reintegration of the former Soviet Union appeals to the majority of people in Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus, it is also popular in other ex-Soviet states: in Central Asia, Ukraine, Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, the same is not true of the elites of these states because they were the main beneficiaries of the breakup of the Soviet Union and the appearance of a dozen new political entities where once there had been a single country.
It is clear that if the idea of a Eurasian Union gains momentum and begins to be put into practice, the elites will fiercely oppose it and use their influence to turn people against integration. This is the key factor in understanding the difficulties that the creation of the EAU will face in the short to medium term. The elites have much to lose, especially in economic terms.
In addition, there are external actors who do not want a powerful new player to appear on the territory of the former Soviet Union that would wield a big influence on global politics and economics and occupy a unique geographical position. These actors will act using the elite. Therefore, the newborn Eurasian Union would have to fight for its survival. Otherwise, it risks either disappearing, or becoming another meaningless bureaucratic unit.
So it follows that the main prerequisite for the survival of the Eurasian Union is an effective information campaign in support of the EAU. This should be oriented toward two different audiences: the people in the countries of the Eurasian three, and those of the former Soviet Union as a whole. The economic benefits and possible political integration of the former Soviet republics that could follow integration should be laid out in language that is accessible and understandable to the general public.
We should not be afraid of getting into debates with opponents of integration. We should be able to win them over in the public space. In general, the idea of Eurasian integration now lacks a broad and diverse public debate. It should convince people that this project will take into account the mistakes of the past and be based on a new platform different from the Soviet Union. People will see that from a strategic point of view it has only one purpose, i.e. to improve their lives, enhance their security and lay the groundwork for building a better future.
A separate information campaign will need to be waged among post-Soviet elites. This aspect of promoting the idea of Eurasian integration almost seems to be the most difficult. The national elites have already determined the priorities of their policies. The creation of a Eurasian Union on the post-Soviet space runs counter to the plans of many of them. It will be a difficult task to persuade them to support the idea, one that cannot be carried out only with information tools. In other words, it will be hard to convince them that integration will be profitable and in their interests.
Thus, the proponents of the Eurasian Union, including Russia, are not faced with an easy task. In the current global environment, where the system of international relations is unstable, the union of the former Soviet republics is absolutely necessary to ensure robust security guarantees and meet the challenges of economic growth and improving peoples lives. There is no other way.
First of all, we should understand that although the idea of the partial reintegration of the former Soviet Union appeals to the majority of people in Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus, it is also popular in other ex-Soviet states: in Central Asia, Ukraine, Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, the same is not true of the elites of these states because they were the main beneficiaries of the breakup of the Soviet Union and the appearance of a dozen new political entities where once there had been a single country.
It is clear that if the idea of a Eurasian Union gains momentum and begins to be put into practice, the elites will fiercely oppose it and use their influence to turn people against integration. This is the key factor in understanding the difficulties that the creation of the EAU will face in the short to medium term. The elites have much to lose, especially in economic terms.
In addition, there are external actors who do not want a powerful new player to appear on the territory of the former Soviet Union that would wield a big influence on global politics and economics and occupy a unique geographical position. These actors will act using the elite. Therefore, the newborn Eurasian Union would have to fight for its survival. Otherwise, it risks either disappearing, or becoming another meaningless bureaucratic unit.
So it follows that the main prerequisite for the survival of the Eurasian Union is an effective information campaign in support of the EAU. This should be oriented toward two different audiences: the people in the countries of the Eurasian three, and those of the former Soviet Union as a whole. The economic benefits and possible political integration of the former Soviet republics that could follow integration should be laid out in language that is accessible and understandable to the general public.
We should not be afraid of getting into debates with opponents of integration. We should be able to win them over in the public space. In general, the idea of Eurasian integration now lacks a broad and diverse public debate. It should convince people that this project will take into account the mistakes of the past and be based on a new platform different from the Soviet Union. People will see that from a strategic point of view it has only one purpose, i.e. to improve their lives, enhance their security and lay the groundwork for building a better future.
A separate information campaign will need to be waged among post-Soviet elites. This aspect of promoting the idea of Eurasian integration almost seems to be the most difficult. The national elites have already determined the priorities of their policies. The creation of a Eurasian Union on the post-Soviet space runs counter to the plans of many of them. It will be a difficult task to persuade them to support the idea, one that cannot be carried out only with information tools. In other words, it will be hard to convince them that integration will be profitable and in their interests.
Thus, the proponents of the Eurasian Union, including Russia, are not faced with an easy task. In the current global environment, where the system of international relations is unstable, the union of the former Soviet republics is absolutely necessary to ensure robust security guarantees and meet the challenges of economic growth and improving peoples lives. There is no other way.
