Russia: Putin advances Eurasian Union

Lightscribe

Banned
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
5,695
Reaction score
1
Location
...On the beach, Strand
Russia: Putin advances Eurasian Union

As the West stumbles, Putin aggressively forges ahead with a new “Soviet-style” union.
Fred WeirOctober 27, 2011 05:21

MOSCOW, Russia — Russian leader Vladimir Putin is pushing a controversial new idea. He wants to create a "Eurasian Union" to integrate the independent republics of the former USSR into a single economic — and eventually political — super-state.

Putin bills it as an eastern version of the European Union. Critics see Russia's age-old imperial ambitions roaring back under a new name.

Amid the debate, most observers have yet to notice how rapidly Putin's brainchild is moving from rhetoric to reality.

Last week, at a meeting in St. Petersburg, eight former Soviet states signed a free-trade treaty that Putin hailed as a first step, possibly leading to full union within 4 years.

Russia: Can Moscow regain superpower status? This fighter jet is key.

"Only in around 2015 may we approach the realization of the idea of creation of Eurasian Union if we work as energetically as we have been," said Putin, who is currently prime minister, but is widely expected to retake the reigns as president next year. "This is the matter of the future."

Among the trade pact's signatories was Ukraine, a country that until recently had been seeking a place among Western nations in NATO and, eventually, the EU.

Ukraine’s apparent drift back into Moscow's orbit is a remarkable sign of the times. It testifies both to the rapid collapse of Western alternatives, as Europe grapples with its own dire crisis, and also to the rising fortunes of raw material-rich Russia. The latter is now poised for twelve more years under Putin, its strongest leader in generations.

"Putin is returning to the Kremlin with this new ideological concept, which appeals to the neo-imperial aspirations of Russians and also holds out economic benefits for former Soviet states that have no chance of joining the Western club," says Alexei Vlasov, director of the independent Center for the Study of the Post-Soviet Space in Moscow.

"This is not a particularly new idea; it's been kicking around for some time," he says. "But I admire how rapidly Putin is moving to put it into practice."

In the pro-government Moscow daily Izvestia earlier this month, Putin wrote that the new grouping would be built around the nucleus of the Russia-Belarus-Kazakhstan customs union, which is set to be upgraded into a common market next year. He insisted that this is not a plan to reincarnate the Soviet Union, but rather to build a voluntary club of former Soviet republics driven primarily by economic imperatives.

"We propose creating a powerful supranational union capable of becoming a pole in the modern world, and at the same time an effective bridge between Europe and the dynamic Asia-Pacific Region," Putin wrote.

Putin's super-state would at first be for post-Soviet nations that want privileged access to Russian energy and markets, and also fear the growing economic might and ambitions of China, says Vladimir Zharikhin, deputy director of the Kremlin-funded Institute of the Commonwealth of Independent States in Moscow.

"There is a global tendency to form economic clusters, such as the EU, ASEAN or NAFTA, but these are all closed to former Soviet states," he says. "Look at Ukraine, which has hit a brick wall in its efforts to integrate with the EU. We need to form our own cluster, there's no other way."

Last week the EU cancelled a meeting to discuss a free-trade deal with Ukraine in protest over what it views as the politically-motivated jailing of Yulia Tymoshenko, Ukraine's top opposition leader. That was just the latest in a string of signs that Ukraine, the most important former Soviet state next to Russia, may be headed for a major geopolitical realignment.

Puting: I Really Do Like Putin singing Blueberry Hill

Both supporters and critics of the idea say Putin's Eurasian Union is not likely to remain a mere economic union for long. Unlike the EU, which brought together democratic market-driven nations, Russia and most other former Soviet states are variations on the theme of authoritarian governance and state-dominated economics. Russia — the world's largest country with a cornucopia of raw materials — will inevitably overshadow all other members of the union and seek to bring them into line with its own priorities, including rivalry with the West.

Moreover, in Putin's Moscow today, a widely believed explanation for the woes currently rocking the euro zone is that the EU was constructed without a strong and cohesive central political authority at its core.

"A Eurasian Union will differ from the EU in that it will be based on Eurasian values, not European ones," says Alexander Dugin, head of the International Eurasian Movement, a group of right-wing businessmen, officials and intellectuals that is thought to have considerable influence in the Kremlin.

He says the EU's reliance on liberal economic institutions to hold it together is its fatal flaw, and that Putin will move to cement the economic integration of the Eurasian Union with strong central authority.

"Economics are important, but we will need to stress the political process of integration," he says. "From what we see happening in Europe it's clear that at times of crisis the whole union can split apart if it is built without strong political and geopolitical values which can transcend the crisis…. The Eurasian Union must be constructed with a strong political horizon in mind."

But for now talk of another Moscow-led super-state, which calls to mind the late Soviet Union, needs to be downplayed in front of international audiences, say Putin supporters.

"We're talking about an economic union but, judging by Putin's concept, political coordination among the members can't be ruled out," says Andrei Klimov, deputy chair of the State Duma's international affairs commission. "However, that's a matter for the distant future, it's not on tomorrow's agenda."

Former deputy prime minister Boris Nemtsov, now a leading liberal critic of the Kremlin, derides the whole idea of a Eurasian Union as "a political joke."

"Voluntary unions can only take place where there is democracy. How can authoritarian dictatorships create a genuine union?" he says. "Putin believes the collapse of the USSR was a great tragedy and he would like to recreate some version of it. But the Soviet Union was built in the 20th century with Communist Party power and the extreme brutality of (Soviet leader) Joseph Stalin. Putin may be a corrupted dictator, but he's no Stalin. This idea is doomed."

But Dugin says the idea of reviving the Soviet Union musters great appeal both inside Russia and around the former Soviet Union, where opinion polls show vast numbers of people remain nostalgic for the prestige and security of belonging to a mighty global superpower.

"Maybe the thought of recreating the USSR is viewed with horror in the West, but around the post-Soviet region it's extremely popular," Dugin says. "Putin can use this as a tool to gain support for his plans, and to help him work out a more coherent vision. It's definitely an idea whose time has arrived."

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/...a/111026/russia-putin-advances-eurasian-union

...
 
How A Eurasian Union Could Control The World's Energy
Posted: November 3, 2011 2:04PM by Brent Radcliffe

Vultures have already begun circling the eurozone, waiting to feast on countries no longer interested in sticking to the single currency adventure (or debacle) that is the euro. While all eurozone countries have probably considered a world in which they once again manage their own currencies, most have probably not considered jumping into bed with a new union agreement. This has not stopped Russian authorities from floating the idea of a "Eurasian Union" between Russia and some of its former satellites, a prospect that brings back memories of the Cold War.

Vladimir Putin, the once president and future president-in-waiting of Russia, floated the idea of a "Eurasian Union" in October. The union would ostensibly have an economic focus similar to the eurozone, though one would have to imagine Russia taking the lead politically and economically, similar to its role during the Cold War. There would not be a struggle for dominance like the EU has seen between France and Germany. Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia had already formed a customs union back in 2010, integrating their economies and reducing restrictions on the movement of goods across their borders. Kyrgyzstan has indicated that it intended on joining the customs union as well. The combined GDP of these four countries was $1,680 billion in 2010, with Russia making up the lion's share ($1,480 billion). For comparison, the current 17 members of the eurozone's GDP totaled close to $12,200 billion in 2010.

Is It Possible?
Could the Eurasian Union be created without the dissolution of the European Union? Unlikely. According to the Maastricht Treaty, the 27 members of the EU are required to adopt the euro, save for the United Kingdom and Denmark. Two countries, Latvia and Lithuania, are former members of the Soviet Union, and thus would have to break the Treaty in order to join a Eurasian Union.

According to the IMF, here's how the Eurasian Union (14 members) would look today, including Lithuania and Latvia:
GDP: About $2,500 billion ($663 billion without Russia)
Population: 288 million (146 million without Russia)

And here's how the European Union would look today, excluding Lithuania, Latvia, Denmark and the United Kingdom.
GDP: Approximately $15,000 billion
Population: 426 million

Making It Matter
In order for a Eurasian Union to really matter, it will need to expand its membership to include countries with more economic clout, but this won't necessarily require bringing the old gang back together. Russia most likely won't face membership competition from the EU along its southern borders, meaning that the battleground states will be in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea region. The EU has already recognized this, creating the Eastern Partnership in 2009 in an effort to reach out to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – all former members of the Soviet Union.

One of the main goals of an EU expansion eastward or Russia's Eurasian Union effort will be the pursuit of oil. Both groups will complain about the sphere of influence infringement, but at the end of the day the geographic prominence of the former Soviet countries will be the prize. Azerbaijan sits on the Caspian Sea and produces 651,700 bbl/day, but has to go through either Georgia or Turkey (another EU hopeful) in order to reach the Black Sea and world markets. Several European countries, including powerful Germany, are already under the thumb of Russia in terms of access to energy, especially of natural gas. A completed Eurasian Union could control up to 33% of the world's proven natural gas reserves (Russia currently has 25%).

Russia In Power
Contrary to the dreams of Russia, most of its former brethren are not overly excited about ceding political or economic power to Putin & Co. In 2005, Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, Slovenia, Romania and Macedonia formed the Community of Democratic Choice in order to counteract Russia's ambitions. This is a signal that any integration will not be easy. Russia will have to play on the fears of exclusion of Eastern European countries, as well as possibly reducing the type of stringent requirements that the EU requires of its members. In order to make this strategy a success it must move quickly, as the expected euro adoption dates before 2020.

The brightest diamond for Russia would be Ukraine, a country of 45 million with a GDP of about $137 billion in 2010. Ukraine has been trying to enter the European Union for years; it already entered into an Association Agreement designed to pave the way for membership, but is facing scrutiny over a string of political debacles since the 2004 Orange Revolution. This includes the recent sentencing of Yulia Tymoshenko, a troubling sign that may point to a rise in the sort of authoritarianism the EU prefers not having to deal with. This may require EU leadership to downplay its foreign policy aspirations for its economic realism.

The Bottom Line
The timing could have been a lot worse for the European Union, but not much worse. If the European Union wants to head off Russia's influence and prevent the creation of a broad Eurasian Union, it first must fix the euro mess. After all, the dissolution of the euro may very well torpedo the entire unification experiment, meaning that any further work at membership expansion will be moot. Thrown into the economic quagmire is the possible return of Vladimir Putin to Russia's presidency, an event that some consider a forgone conclusion. If Putin makes the Eurasian Union the focus of his next term and showers affection on former Soviet states while Europe dithers, he may very well succeed in the creation of a European counterweight.

http://financialedge.investopedia.c...-Control-The-Worlds-Energy.aspx#axzz1cvuvdzNU

03 November 2011, 10:04
Eurasian Union should play the most active part in world destiny, Russian Church official believes


Moscow, November 3, Interfax - The Moscow Patriarchate is inspired with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's idea to set up the Eurasian Union.

"I hope the Eurasian Union will enter the history as one of the strongest international associations which will positively influence on everything happening in the world and especially among nations-organizers," head of the Synodal Department for Church and Society Relations Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin said at the Weekly Comment program on the Soyuz Orthodox TV channel.

According to him, the Union should "refine original political culture of our countries that wouldn't be blindly copied from this or that source, usually a Western one, but will be rooted in centuries-old traditions of our politics, our principles of cooperation between people and authorities, our models of ways how people belonging to various classes participate in certain decisions of authorities, in correcting the course of authorities."

Besides, the priest believes the Eurasian Union should play "the most active part in world destiny and its certain regions whether the Balkans, the Middle East, the Latin America and so on."

According to him, today no nation can survive alone and adequately influence global processes and thus its own destiny and "the fact of setting up above-national organizations in Africa, in Islamic world, in South and North America proves it."

Father Vsevolod expressed hope that members of the Eurasian Union will mutually support each other "not only in paper, but in practice, in those situations when support is needed, when a nation faces economic difficulties or a danger of outside pressure or inner quarrel provoked by outside forces."

"Russia shouldn't be Europe's policeman as it is called again after forming the Collective Security Treaty Organization, but should fraternally help nations in the situations when their historical choice is raped or changed without their will," he is convinced.

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=8851



Interesting times ahead... :whistle:
 
I did not realize Putins hated Russia so much.
 
you mean *reads a copy of 1984 which should have been 2084*

Just of topic a bit. When I read 1984 as a teenager I never realised we would actually have that type of society one day!
 
Fascist putin pushing full steam ahead with his Eurasian Union.

Presidents of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan signed the Agreement on the Eurasian Economic Union. Some are comparing the new union to the EU, while others see it as a revival of the Soviet Union. What’s the reality? What is the vision behind the new project and how is it viewed by its participants, potential partners and competitors? Voice of Russia is discussing these issues with Dosym Satpaev , political analyst from Kazakhstan, Konrad Zasztowt,an analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, and Kirill Koktysh, Assistant Professor at MGIMO University in Moscow.

The Agreement on the Eurasian Economic Union, signed in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, will come into force on the Customs Union territory on January 1, 2015 after it is ratified by the countries parliaments.

The Agreement guarantees its parties the free movement of goods, services, capital and work force within the Union borders. It also provides for a coordinated policy in some of the key sectors, like energy, industry, agriculture and transport.

Speaking at the meeting in Astana Putin said: “We are creating a powerful and attractive center of economic development, a major regional market bringing together over 170 million people".

US leaders have been viewing the Union as “a move to re-Sovietize the region” .“Let's make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it”, Hilary Clinton, a former US Secretary of State used to declare.

One thing is clear: as any ambitious project, the Eurasian Economic Union is a great opportunity and - a huge challenge….

Dosym Satpaev , political analyst from Kazakhstan:

“This idea has a very long history. In 1994, in Moscow the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev in the Moscow University spoke about establishing a new economic integration union. But in the 1990’es this idea didn’t receive much support from other post-Soviet countries.

In the last five years we can see the situation has changed. Kazakhstan’s idea about the establishment of a new economic union was supported by Russia and Belarus. In 2010 these three countries adopted a new Customs Union code and from 2010 we can see some period of development of this integration project.

This year, in June Armenia is going to enter into the Eurasian Economic Union. Maybe this year or next year Kyrgyzstan will enter this Eurasian Economic Union. And I believe that the number of members in this integration project will increase in the future.

But in Kazakhstan we can see not only a growing number of supporters of this integration process in the post-Soviet area, we can see not only the official statements about the profits that Kazakhstan will receive from the participation in this Eurasian Economic Union. In Kazakhstan we can also see the anti-Eurasian mood.

At the beginning of this year in Kazakhstan an anti-Eurasian movement was established. And in April this year the organizer of this movement in Almaty organized the first anti-Eurasian forum where different experts and politicians made statements about some stress for Kazakhstan, if our country will participate in this integration project together with Russia, because in Kazakhstan some part of people, some part of political players believes that this Eurasian Economic Union is only the first step to the reanimation of the Soviet Union.

And I believe that, maybe, in the future the opponents will receive more support from the society, because inside our Kazakh society we can see an increase in the national patriotic movement. And, maybe, in the future in Kazakhstan will appear a new political leader who will decide to make some changes in the Eurasian Economic Union agreement”…

Konrad Zasztowt, an analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs:

“With regards to the Eurasian Economic Union, first, I would say that at the beginning it was planned as a Eurasian Union or something very similar to the EU, not only in the economic aspects, but also in the political integration aspect, as we see in the case of the EU.

But last fall we saw that the countries, the Russia’s allies like Kazakhstan and Belarus were less interested in this deeper political integration, but were more focused on the economic aspect of this integration.

But still, there are many obstacles. As we see, those countries like Belarus and Kazakhstan, they underline that there are some gains which they can have from the Eurasian Economic Union, but there are also the potential losses. For example, in the case of Belarus it is about the exports of petrochemical products, which was a very important source of income for Belarus in the last years. But now, the taxes will be higher. So, it can produce some economic problems for Belarus.

I'm sure that Mr. Lukashenko is a very proficient President, and he is going to negotiate the best terms for his republic. I was rather surprised, when I read some experts viewing it as a revival of the Soviet Union. Do you share this vision?

We live in different times, of course. So, it is not possible to reestablish the Soviet Union – the country which existed in the last century. But what is common in these two projects, I would say, is that Russia is the leader and Russia is trying to be a leader of the group of countries. But, of course, the Russia’s potential is not so big, as it was in the case of the Soviet Union.

So, now the question is whether it will work, this economic union, because, as I said, there are many-many problems in the bilateral relations between those three countries.

Well, and I suppose this is quite natural, because the project is really ambitious.

I would say that every attempt to make the economies open is good for the economies of the region and also for the EU’s economy. So, I would underline that membership in the WTO is very important. For example, Kazakhstan is seeking membership and Russia is already in the WTO. And in case of Kazakhstan, I think that their point of view is that integration with Russia will help them to have easier access to the European markets”.

EDIT: Forgot to show the link, that the quote for Clinton is fake. Of course.
 
Last edited:
Kirill Koktysh , Assistant Professor at MGIMO University in Moscow:

“Actually it is quite hard to give the details right now, because the Eurasian Union is going to be reshaped in the few next years. The matter is that the initial project was that the Eurasia Union should complement the EU with what it needs and should be also a bridge that will provide for transportation of goods from Asia to the EU.

Now, this concept is under question. The other concept, that this should be a semi-isolated economy with a certain level of protection to the national producers, this concept should be developed.

So, it is a classical liberal structure, that taking into account Russia’s joining the WTO, predictably should lead to the domination of large transnational companies. It is based on the following liberties – the liberty of movement of goods, of people, of capitals. And actually, this construction of the union provided a few perspectives for Russia and quite fewer possibilities for Belarus and Kazakhstan.

Now, after the Western sanctions were imposed against Russia and Russia turned to reindustrialization for closing its market and for producing all the good that it currently acquires abroad, this gives a fantastic perspective to Belarus, first of all, as a single country that managed to keep all its industrial potential untouched and in good condition.

This policy of replacement of all the imported goods could provide the Eurasian Union economic growth by 8-10% in the next 10-15 years. So, it is a quite good perspective, but actually the conditions of how it will be build, how it would be developed and what would be the role of each country that joins the Eurasian Union is something that should be discussed and formulated in the nearest year or two.

So, the matter is that the old constructions won’t work. Nevertheless, it is signed and new construction should be developed in the period of the next several years, I guess, a year or two, not more.

I was just talking to an expert from Kazakhstan and he was telling me about a mixed attitude of Kazakh people to this union. Why?

It is quite natural, because the Russian involvement in the Crimea was legitimated by the need to protect Russians. That is something that made all the post-Soviet countries more or less cautious about Russia, because every country has Russian inhabitants inside their national borders. So, actually, this was a challenge that…well, I wouldn’t say that it led to distrust, but it actually did nothing to build mutual trust.

This means that currently the union is going to be based only on economic structure, like the EU was between 1960’es and 1991. So, the same would be with the Eurasian Union, it would be built on the economic basis, every country would be quite cautious not ruin trust and provoke any other country’s bad suspicions.

This means that common currency and supranational institutions is something that would appear later, but not now and that would be more or less symbolic.

Now, it is quite obvious that there are perspectives, but how they would be realized, what can be made of the Eurasian Union? Primarily, would it rely on the internal resources or would it develop broad cooperation with the EU? So far, it is not clear. Probably, it would be a combination of the both approaches.

One thing is obvious: the liberal basis won’t be the actual basis of the Eurasian Union, it should be complemented with the principles of protectionism and state intervention.

Does it have anything to do with the revival of the Soviet Union?

Well, it is quite early to speak about the revival of the Soviet Union, because it is actually an economic union, not a political one. And for the EU, it took 30 years to move to a political structure and, actually, this political structure is not perfect.

So, it is quite questionable how soon the Eurasian Union can move closer to the supranational political structures that could be compared to the Soviet Union. And, obviously, it is not a task for the nearest period. Now, it is a broad economic cooperation and state coordination of this cooperation, with the active participation of all three states – Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan”.

http://voiceofrussia.com/radio_broadcast/25298789/272953320/

Doing his bit for the eventual one world currency. ;)

Other prominent advocates agree with the Mundell strategy for achieving a world currency managed by a global central bank. “We’ll probably get there by the merger of monetary unions,” explained Morrison Bonpasse, founder and president of the Single Global Currency Association and author of The Single Global Currency: Common Cents for the World, in an interview with The New American. “But there are several possible routes. One is to continue the current regionalization of currencies, to include North America, and creation, expansion and merger of monetary unions; and then combine those currencies into one. Another is for smaller countries to continue to ‘ize’ their nations’ legal tender, as in ‘dollarize’ and ‘euroize.’ … Once the ‘tipping point’ is reached where one currency supports approximately 40-50 percent of the world’s GDP, the movement will accelerate to anoint that currency as the single global currency.” The organization’s target date: 2024.

Clearly, the move toward regional currencies is picking up traction, especially during this decade.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/economics/item/4498-waking-up-to-a-world-currency
 
Although the presidents of Armenia and Kyrgyzstan attended the signing ceremony and expressed an interest in joining, the missing guest at the party was Ukraine. That country’s previous government in Kiev tacked back and forth on whether it would join the European Union or the new Eurasian group, eventually choosing Mr. Putin’s offer and igniting a public uprising that ended up bringing down the president in February.

“We lost someone along the way, I mean Ukraine,” said Aleksandr Lukashenko, the president of Belarus. Mr. Lukashenko, who received a $2 billion loan and energy concessions from Russia just before the signing, acknowledged that the union as constituted was something less than he had anticipated. “Unfortunately, it is not the agreement that our partners originally announced,” he said, according to Belta, the official Belarus news agency.

He also called for economic union to be followed by political and military unity, a concept that Kazakhstan rejected.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/30/w...residents-of-kazakhstan-and-belarus.html?_r=0

;)
 
Necro post from 2011.

So the European Union is OK, but this Eastern one is either fascist or a revival of Soviet times?

Desperate to prove something it seems.
 
Necro post from 2011.

So the European Union is OK, but this Eastern one is either fascist or a revival of Soviet times?

Desperate to prove something it seems.

None of the posts in this this thread said the European Union is OK. The EU is currently very shaky. Cant see it surviving as a political union much longer. As an economic one, possibly scaled down a bit.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X