The agenda of the 11th session, or the round table of the Moscow Economic Forum, calls us first of all to turn to the analysis of disintegration processes in the post-Soviet space, which is necessary to assess the subjective and objective prerequisites for their preservation and transformation, as well as to determine the driving forces and strategies for integration interaction.
The collapse of the USSR determined the centrifugal nature of the development of the post-Soviet space, simultaneously dividing it into multidirectional segments. As a result of the unpreparedness of many republics for new political and economic conditions, a model was realized that is called conflict disintegration , launched as a result of a number of political acts that lead to loosening of integration structures.
Among the factors hindering integration processes and carrying a disintegration impulse, the following can be noted:
The creation of the CIS took place in a short time, without a serious study of the new political and economic reality and in the absence of an effective concept and strategy of interstate integration. Political conflicts both within the independent states themselves and between states played their destructive role .
Another factor was the multidirectional restructuring of political regimes, economic structures and public administration;
The most serious negative effect was the rupture of economic and production ties between the former republics, which previously constituted a single economic space based on centralized planning and specialization.
The shock restructuring and liberalization of the economy significantly contributed to the disintegration, when each republic was forced to equip its economic sectors in spontaneously developing market conditions, sometimes from scratch. A negative role was played by the degradation of industrial sectors - mechanical engineering, machine tool building, aircraft and automotive industries, and other technically complex industries.
The course towards a fuel and raw material economy has become one of the triggers for the collapse of the Soviet space. The raw material orientation of the Russian economy also seriously weakened Russia's leading role in the CIS and contributed to the deepening of disintegration tendencies. Russia and the republics with raw materials potential considered the privatization of raw materials as the main source of their economic growth and development and did not want to share these resources with others.
6. National movements in the republics with a course towards independence under the auspices of national, cultural and religious identity. Various claims against neighboring republics and restructuring of relations with their national minorities with armed clashes within the newly formed states and between states. The lost civic identity in the space of the former USSR was replaced by a basic ethnic identity associated with the territorial issue;
7. Local conflicts have led to the emergence on the territory of the former Soviet republics of state entities that are not recognized or partially recognized by the world community.
8. Integration aspirations were initially concentrated around the Russian Federation . Monocentric integration gradually began to be reformatted into polycentric with the formation of various sub-regional associations, such as GUAM , the Central Asian Cooperation Organization ( CACO ), the Customs Union, then the EAEU , etc., and with the formation of new integration spaces.
9. The former republics of the USSR began to face geopolitical problems , began to seek benefits in integration with other political and economic entities and with countries such as the European Union, China, Turkey, etc. The crisis in relations between the largest Eurasian power, the Russian Federation, and Western countries and their allies objectively creates a threat of splitting not only the post-Soviet Eurasian space, but also the space of Greater Eurasia as a whole
The influence of the external factor has a stable tendency to increase. The Ukrainian crisis led to serious disintegration consequences. In the new geopolitical conditions of confrontation between Russia and the West, and in the post-Soviet, and wider, Eurasian space, the United States, China, the EU countries, Turkey began to actively promote their interests, offering their unification projects, leading to the division of this space into new geopolitical segments.
The European Union initiated the Eastern Partnership program , according to which the formation of a regional union of these independent states was to take place without Russia. Turkey, however, advanced the furthest , whose integration efforts, which initially fit within the framework of ethno-cultural rapprochement, gradually developed into a political project based on the ideas of pan-Turkism and religious community. Turkey's participation on the side of Azerbaijan in the last, successful for them war in Nagorno-Karabakh, opened up new prospects for Turkey, which eventually led to the creation of the Organization of Turkic States. Against this background, the inadequate position of Russia during and after this war greatly weakened its position in the South Caucasus . Turkey and Azerbaijan, supplementing the motto "one nation, two states" with the wording "two states, one single army", approved the Turkish, NATO military presence in Azerbaijan, formalizing it with a comprehensive military-political treaty.
The new political doctrine, based on the nationalist concept of ethnic, linguistic and religious community with a focus on Turkey, not only brings non-Turkic post-Soviet formations outside the integration space, but also creates a serious threat of disintegration of the Eurasian space. It is not in tune with the trends of modern political and economic development and is fraught with significant risks for the members of such associations themselves, bringing benefits mainly to the great powers that use them. In this case, for the United States, Great Britain and some EU states, which are trying with the help of Turkey to oust Russia from the region and have control over this part of the Eurasian space in order to prevent the strengthening of the influence of China, their main rival.
It can be said that the very term "post-Soviet space" today acquires a "new edition". It no longer fits into the historical framework of the Soviet past and, under the influence of global processes, acquires new coordinates, which makes it possible to speak of a Eurasian integration field that includes both the post-Soviet space and new segments beyond its borders.
The Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), which began its work in January 2015 and achieved a certain integration result, became a new integration structure designed to bring integration trends to a fundamentally new level . In the 2021 EDB Center for Integration Research surveys, in which 337 companies from all EAEU countries took part, most of them (73% on average) indicated that Eurasian integration makes it easier to do business on the territory of the EAEU member states.
For Armenia, a positive factor was the acceleration of the pace of integration development within the EAEU, the increase in the role of the Union countries in foreign trade. The advantage of Armenia's accession to the EAEU was not only tariff preferences, but also uniform rules for non-tariff regulation of the common market . Cooperation with Iran has become a promising direction of Armenia's activity within the framework of membership in the EAEU . Armenia is the only EAEU country that has a land border with Iran, and a free economic zone was created on Armenia's border with Iran in 2017. An important role was also played by preferential investment loans of the Eurasian Development Bank (EDB, in particular, for the implementation of projects for the construction of a reservoir and the modernization of irrigation systems, the construction of the North-South highway corridor.
However, despite significant achievements in terms of integration interaction, many companies of the EAEU countries face barriers, primarily in trade. These include technical (labeling, certification, etc.), difficulties in customs clearance and sanitary standards, lack of information about foreign markets and potential partners, financial measures (currency regulation, regulation of payment terms, obtaining and using credit to finance imports) and other.
The disintegration trend retains its relevance, manifesting itself in new forms and still remaining a characteristic feature of this space. It can be characterized as divergent disintegration , determined by the slow disintegration of space, a change in its structure. As a result, new integrated spaces are being formed with a changed structure of relationships in place of the old ones, which actually means a restructuring of integration spaces. Therefore, at this stage, it is becoming increasingly important to search for ways and use the possibilities of conjugation, balancing such integration systems as the EAEU, SCO, etc.
Obviously, the most important factor for overcoming the disintegration trend and strengthening and driving force of integration processes in the post-Soviet space is mutually beneficial economic cooperation. Regional economic integration involves optimizing the conditions for interaction and the mechanism of economic development based on a more efficient use of the division of labor between national economies. It is also important to increase the efficiency of relations between production structures, diversify intercompany ties, which in turn needs interstate regulation, raised to the supranational level by education. interstate governing bodies for the coordination and implementation of joint economic, financial, monetary, scientific and technical, social, as well as foreign and defense policies.
No less important is the further optimization of the common customs space of the EAEU with the connection to it in various forms of other Eurasian countries and neighbors of the region and the implementation of non-tariff measures to facilitate trade and investment between states.
Among the integration measures, one can also highlight the harmonization of standards and rules, the availability of financial services, the reduction of risks in cooperation with other states, the increase in the volume of real and venture investments, the creation of conditions that facilitate the receipt of loans to small and medium-sized businesses for the organization and development of joint ventures and investment, supported through the system of insurance guarantees. This will be facilitated by the strengthening of interbank relations, expanding access to information and consulting services, including through interbank information and consulting activities . Among the possible measures to remove barriers by business, such as mutual recognition of product evaluation procedures, harmonization of labeling rules and norms, development of unified requirements and rules for the circulation of goods are also proposed. Great importance is attached to taking into account the opinion of the private sector, holding more meetings and forums.
The most popular measures within the EAEU were digital transformation measures. Digitalization can become a driver of integration processes , a tool for the development of economic and cultural ties between countries. It will facilitate the simplification and acceleration of trade and investment processes, reduce barriers to international cooperation, and improve conditions for the exchange of experience and knowledge. It seems important to develop an effective digitalization strategy that takes into account the prospects for the development of digital infrastructure , the specific needs of participants, ensuring the security and sustainability of digital systems and processes. Priority should be given to the implementation of the digital agenda program. EAEU with the involvement of external participants.
To achieve closer cooperation in the post-Soviet space, it is necessary to solve many challenges and problems, among which one of the most acute is the problem of borders between the republics , which develops into armed conflicts. Available in the founding documents of the CIS - in the Agreement on the Establishment of the CIS and in the Alma-Ata Declaration, the wording on the mutual recognition of "existing borders" is amorphous, does not clearly define where these borders should lie, should these be the administrative borders of the Soviet republics, or those borders which were under the de facto control of the newly independent states at the time of the signing of these documents. In this regard, it seems necessary that the countries of the region form and agree on common rules and principles for all , delimitation and demarcation of borders between participating countries, such as the use of geodetic and cartographic methods and documents, recognition of natural borders, consideration and protection of the rights of indigenous peoples and minorities and establishing mechanisms for resolving disputes. The agreement should have certain institutional design, provide for measures for the management of border areas, outline the creation and implementation of joint programs for the development of border areas and infrastructure projects.
The institutionalization of integration mechanisms is important for all components, but especially for the regulation of contentious issues and conflicts . The EAEU Court is aimed at considering economic disputes . In this regard, the idea of expanding its jurisdiction, or creating a Court of Conciliation and Arbitration , similar to the one that exists in the OSCE, within which a conciliation commission has been created, and border security monitoring centers are functioning, seems fruitful.
There is no need to prove the exceptional role of security guarantees and the non-use of force in resolving contentious issues as one of the most important factors in achieving real integration. It was for these purposes that the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) was created, which today includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan. However, the activity of this organization raises many questions. Thus, in 2021 and 2022, Azerbaijani troops occupied and currently hold a total of 300 sq. kilometers of the sovereign territory of the Republic of Armenia, as a result of which more than 300 people died, including civilians. However, the CSTO not only did not provide military-political assistance to Armenia, but also did not give a clear political assessment of the situation, which gave rise to serious doubts about its viability .
Another important, but not yet properly assessed, factor may be the active participation and enhancement of the role of the Third Sector , the expert community, public associations, professional organizations and other civil society structures for joint discussion and search for solutions.
We have already mentioned the negative role of the fuel and raw material orientation of the economy of Russia and other states in the disintegration of the post-Soviet space. The course towards industrialization , aimed at the development of high-tech industries in Russia, the largest Eurasian economy with a huge integration potential, will undoubtedly be an effective incentive to intensify integration processes . I am sure that the Moscow Economic Forum, in which we have the honor to participate, its materials with a serious analysis of the state of affairs and scientifically based recommendations, will make a significant contribution to this matter.
留言