Russia in the Greater Eurasian Partnership: from Civilization Theory to Political Practice

Introduction. The article overviews the place of Russia in the promotion and construction of the Greater Eurasian partnership. The idea of this partnership was proposed by President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin for the interfacing of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) and the Chinese transport initiative “One Belt, One Road” (OBOR).

Materials and methods. The study is based on the synthesis of the civilizational concept of Eurasianism and the theory of international integration. The work analyses official documents of EEU and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), declarations of their officials, screening mass media, trade and economic statistics.

Results. The statistics show that EEU is gaining success, although at present its developed is slowing. Third countries still play a significant role in foreign trade and investments of EEU member states. China competes with Russia for the dominance in

 Central Asia. The interface of EEU and SCO integration processes, as well as the Chinese initiative “One Belt, One Road” should be developed in view of Russia’s interests.

Discussion and conclusion. The Greater Eurasian partnership can be considered as component of a new world architecture underlied by the system of regional and interregional economic and integration groups. The post-Soviet countries of Eurasia are united by a common history, civilizational and cultural prerequisites for integration with the unifying role of Russia. No serious project on the continent can be implemented without its participation.

1. Vernadsky, G.V., 2000. Nachertaniye russkoy istorii. [The inscription of Russian history]. St. Petersburg.

2. Gumilev, L.N., 2001. Ot Rusi k Rossii: Ocherki etnicheskoy istorii. [From Rus’ to Russia: Essays on Ethnic History]. Moscow.

3. Dugin, A.G., 2012. Geopolitika Rossii. [Geopolitics of Russia]. Moscow.

4. Evraziiskii ekonomicheskii soyuz [Eurasian Economic Union.]. Pod red. E. Yu. Vinokurova [Edited by E. Yu. Vinokurov]. 2017. St. Petersburg: Center for Integration Studies Eurasian Development Bank.

5. Migranyan, A., Shavina, E., 2018. Potencial rasshireniya sotrudnichestva stran SHOS: ekonomicheskie i energeticheskie aspekty [The Potential Expansion of the SCO Countries Cooperation: Economic and Energy Aspects]. Postsovetskiy materik [Post-Soviet Continent]. Volume 2 (2). P. 118-133.

6. Savitsky, P.N., 1997. Kontinent Yevraziya. [Continent Eurasia]. Moscow.

7. Trubetskoy, N.S., 2014. Obshcheyevraziyskiy natsionalizm [Pan-Eurasian Nationalism]. Russkoye zarubezh’ye: Istoriya i sovremennost’. Volume 3. P. 198-206.

8. Alimov, R., 2018. The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation: Its role and place in the development of Eurasia. Journal of Eurasian Studies. Volume 9. No. 2. P. 114-124.

9. Dragneva, R., Wolczuk, K., 2017. The Eurasian Economic Union: Deals, Rules and the Exercise of Power. Chatham House, May. URL: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/publications/research/2017-05-02-eurasian-economic-union-dragneva-wolczuk.pdf

10. Haas, E.B., 1958. The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces 1950-1957. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

11. Hann, Ch., 2016. A Concept of Eurasia. Current Anthropology. Volume 57. No. 1. P. 1-27.

12. Heimenz, U., Langhammer R.J., 1990. Regional integration among developing countries: Opportunities, obstacles, and options. Tubingen: Westview Press.

13. Hosny, A.S., 2013. Theories of Economic Integration: A Survey of the Economic and Political Literature. International. Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences. Volume 2 (5). P.133-155.

14. Kirkham, K., 2016. The formation of the Eurasian Economic Union: How successful is the Russian regional hegemony? Journal of Eurasian Studies. Volume 7. No. 2. P. 111-128.

15. Laruelle, M., 2004. The two faces of contemporary Eurasianism: an imperial version of Russian nationalism. Nationalities Papers. Volume 32. No.1. P. 115–136.

16. Li, Y., 2018. The greater Eurasian partnership and the Belt and Road Initiative: Can the two be linked? Journal of Eurasian Studies. Volume 9. No. 2. P. 94-99.

17. Moga, T.L., 2009. The Contribution of the Neofunctionalist and Intergovernmentalist Theories to the Evolution of the European Integration Process. Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences. Volume 1. No. 3. P. 796-807.

18. Mostafaa, G., Mahmood, M., 2018. Eurasian Economic Union: Evolution, challenges and possible future directions. Journal of Eurasian Studies. Volume 9. No. 2. P. 163-172.

19. Rueda-Junquera, F., 2006. European Integration Model: Lessons for the Central American Common Market. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series. Volume 6. No. 4. February.

20. Sergi, B.S., 2018. Putin’s and Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union: A hybrid half-economics and half-political “Janus Bifrons”. Journal of Eurasian Studies. Volume 9. No. 1. P. 52-60.

21. Vinokurov, E., 2017.Eurasian Economic Union: Current state and preliminary results. Russian Journal of Economics. Volume 3. No.1. P. 54-70.