Two of Ukraine and one decision

Two of Ukraine and one decision

With all its own demand and trivial chances for a successful implementation, proclaimed Putin Eurasian integration may run into a severe obstacle in the form of Ukraine

Vladimir Putin devoted his program article Eurasian Union. Society that message was received very seriously. The article itself was very cautious and moderate, it has once again highlighted the importance of the integration processes in the economy of the post-Soviet states. But those who are familiar with the problems, have seen it as something more — a short summary and a roomy fully certain strategic course that will probably become the axis of Putin after his return to the presidency in March 2012.

Putin says in the main about the economy, but not limited to the transfer of economic integration initiatives (the Customs Alliance, EurAsEC, CES) at the end of the sacred text says the phrase — "Eurasian Union", clearly alluding to the analogue Euro Union. And it can not be a coincidence: Putin outlines of the processes of economic integration more than the highest — geopolitical, political — purpose. Creating space for Northern Eurasia new supranational union, built on common civilizational identity.

As the European Union, uniting the country and society related to European civilization began with the Coal and Steel Community, that later turn into a new uniform supranational entities with their own, while Indeed, the nominal president, parliament, with its own currency and the general socio-economic strategy, and Eurasian alliance designated Putin as long guide, goals, horizon historical path. And this is serious.

Declaration of the Eurasian Union: semantics

The idea of the Eurasian Union in the early 90's were developed in parallel 2-countries — Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev, and in Russia, "Eurasian Movement". Nazarbayev in 1994 in Moscow, announced the project of political integration of the post-Soviet space, and even proposed a draft constitution of the Eurasian Union as a whole repeats the EU constitution. In an era of universal collapse and saturated separatist processes it looked extravagant and obviously not the time. But Nazarbayev insight to be envied, he clearly recognized even then that at some point in time for the political Eurasian integration will certainly come.

On the other hand, the idea of a Eurasian Union intensively developed "Eurasian Movement" in Russia, following the line of the first Russian Eurasians who laid the basis of this political philosophy. Creation of the Eurasian Union was the main historical, political and ideological purpose Russian Eurasians, because this project embodies within itself all the core values and standards of Eurasianism as a complete political philosophy.
So Makarov, Putin, referring to the Eurasian Union, stood for a political concept, laden with enormous political and geopolitical sense.

Eurasian alliance as a concrete embodiment of the Eurasian project contains within itself just three levels: planetary, regional and domestic political.
In a planetary scale is a question of establishing instead a unipolar or "nonpolar" (global) model of a multi-polar world, where the pole can only be a massive integrated regional education (higher than on their own scale, own a set of economic, military-strategic and energy potential of what they own on separately, even the great powers).

On a regional scale refers to the development of an integration of education that can be a pole of a multipolar world. In the West, this integration project of the European Union can act. For Russia it means the integration of the post-Soviet space in a single strategic unit.
On the domestic level, Eurasian identity assertion strategic centralism that does not allow even a hint of the presence inside the country prototypes state statehood in the face of the Federation. But at the same time, this means strengthening the cultural, linguistic and social identity of the ethnic groups that usually are a part of.

In their assessments international situation, Putin has not once declared multipolarity. And Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov, in recent years, often mentions the "polycentric world order" as a more desirable model of organization structure of international relations.
The need to distinguish between civilization (political education) and ethnic groups in the internal politics Putin spoke to the spring and summer of 2011, and this means that there Eurasian model was adopted.

So Makar, the mention of the Eurasian Union is not something isolated, but it comes in the context of the system model, which in turn builds Putin on the eve of a new presidency own. All three Eurasian vector is available.
So, we need to prepare for that particular Eurasianism, and not a liberal democracy (as many supporters waited for the current president Dmitry Medvedev) will become the dominant political philosophy in Russia in the near future.
But from this satisfied for the Eurasians and not very satisfied for ascertaining Atlanticist and Westerners should turn to the question, what are the real prospects for the creation of a Eurasian Union? What resources for this integration we have? What are the obstacles and challenges await us in this way? Which of the states near abroad can we expect? From whom should wait counter or pinned?

Reconciliation with reality

Consider the process of Eurasian integration and its causes can be whatever level of detail. And that should be monitored frequently and engage at various levels. But if you read about the hierarchy of problems, the most severe and the most profound discrepancy is today the Ukrainian question.
Eurasian alliance will be created in your own kernel if it will include our homeland, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine. This is a necessary and sufficient minimum integration. This does not diminish the value of niskolechko and other countries, but the data four countries make a critical mass that will allow confidently talk about the development of the Eurasian Union. These countries make the Alliance a reality — permanently and decisively.

With regard to Kazakhstan and Belarus fundamentally no problems. Individual parts may hinder integration, but the presidents of those countries and in turn inexorably draw a line on the union with Russia in a single supranational education. This is the political will as Nazarbaev and Lukashenko. Some difficulties should not overshadow the head: our country as a whole are ready for integration, and their political governance in general divides specifically Eurasian position. Putin, for his initiative in this matter far not the first. But particularly from Moscow and its political will determine the fate of the Eurasian Union. Without determination, consistency and effectiveness of the Russian Federation no integration can not be in sight.
But that's where the real work begins, so it is in the Ukraine. This is the rather weak position of integration and the greatest issue for the future of the creation of the Eurasian Union.

Ukrainian discrepancy: the civilizational dimension

In the light of the creation of the Eurasian Union of Ukraine is a real problem of. This dilemma can not be reduced only to the capricious, unprincipled and corruption Ukrainian political elites who prefer to trade with the West and Russia for the volume effect, making money out of it as their capital. Also erroneously reduce everything to the presence of Ukrainian nationalism, or the work of American network effects. These reasons a
re present, but not decisive. Everything is much more difficult.

The fact that regional integration implies a common civilizational framework. Specifically on this principle united European Union countries, and it also fits into the base of Eurasian integration. Society will merge with a similar civilizational code.

In this sense, Ukraine is a society with a dual identity. We litsezreem in her Orthodox East Slavic country with the same historical roots as that of the Great Russians and Belarusians. But at the same time since the era of the specific contradictions between western Russia and eastern Russian principalities are not just significant, and will affect the geopolitical and sociological bases of the respective companies. The fight between Vladimir and Galician princes for the throne of Kiev reflects not just vnutridinasticheskie squabbles Rurik older branches, and two types of society, argues evenly on the east and west of Old Rus.

Vladimir Russia tends to be autocratic model, Galician and Volyn Rus basically reproduces the feudal-aristocratic model of their own Eastern European neighbors (Poland, Hungary, etc.). In this period Horde civilizational division increases, and uniformly western regions of the former single Kievan Rus received entirely distinctive features of civilization — with a strong influence of the Lithuanian beginning of the Polish nobility, Catholic and Uniate.

With all of this far not the whole territory of Ukraine today can be defined as the Russian West: truly the deepest roots of this Ruthenian identity has taken only in Western Ukraine, which became predominant. In eastern Ukraine, by contrast, is dominated by an all-Russian style, mixed with the Cossack social tradition. In central Ukraine, a mixed society. Crimea largely populated by the Great Russians.

West-Ukrainian factor pretend, that forms the basis for their own, around a core, an unusual "Ukrainian nation," asserting their differences at first in the face of the Russian Federation and its social identity. Ukrainian idea that there is a thought anti-Russian, anti-Moscow. For this sector of the Ukrainian society civilized Europe is a natural environment, and our homeland is seen as a "colonial power". It is here that originate sources of Ukrainian nationalism, affecting in varying degrees, to all Ukrainian society.

It seems that we may feel about it, you need to take an empirical fact: in the modern Ukraine has a significant "zapadensky" approach that consistently and stubbornly considers Ukraine to European civilization and considers at least some rapprochement with the East as "a new enslavement of Ukraine under the heel of Muscovites." This is a steady trend, and not the result of surface propaganda. In this case, we are dealing with the refusal of recognition of the common civilizational identity with Russia, as well, very severe objection to all integration initiatives. In the presence of this pole vsepolnotsenno Ukraine can not enter into the integration process, and hence, the prospect of the creation of the Eurasian Union postponed.

The importance of Ukraine

But for that to Eurasian alliance has become a truly powerful pole of a multipolar world polycentric architecture, Ukraine must necessarily be inside it. It is very well aware of geopolitics, including South American, exactly opposed strengthening the role of Russia and Eurasia as a whole in the world. For example, Zbigniew Brzezinski warns in his own articles and books about the need to at least split the methods by Ukraine with Russia to take away this potential block even the theoretical ability to become in the future a harsh self-force able to limit the U.S. interests in this region of the world and to conduct its own independent policy from the Yankees . If Ukraine will join the Eurasian bloc, it benefits Land. If it will tear off and put under the control of Atlanticism, the West becomes an important trump card and get their hands on the most powerful lever deter potential geopolitical revival of Russia.

Because Moscow can not just strike out Ukraine from the integration of the project and the process of building a Eurasian Union? To be successful, must one way or another to solve the problem of Ukrainian.

Eastern Ukraine — Integration Card

In the Ukrainian society, together with the core zapadenskim, there is another socio-cultural field, which, in contrast, tends to be of, is to integrate, understand intimacy, if not identical, to the Great Russians and Belarusians. In this vein, and the reasons for the common historical past, and Orthodoxy as the predominant religion, and the Russian language, cultural and psychological intimacy societies. In eastern Ukraine and the Crimea this identity is dominant, which is reflected in the constant and ongoing electoral process, when the inhabitants of the East and the Crimea consistently vote for politicians who promise a rapprochement with Russia, or at least to establish good neighborly relations with her. This is a huge potential for integration, which, under any circumstances, do not look down.

Ukraine now consists of 2-identities, 2-people. Zapadenskoe core understand themselves as part of Europe. The eastern and southern regions consider themselves Russian and Eurasian civilization. East has nothing against integration, the West stubbornly resists her and deliberately. The boundary between civilizations, in the case of Ukraine, does not coincide with municipal boundaries, but shares this country into two almost equal parts, walking around on the Dnieper River. Gravitates to the right bank of Europe, the left bank — to the Russian Federation and, accordingly, the Eurasian Union and other forms of integration (preparatory and economic — Customs alliance single economic space, etc.).
So there are two of Ukraine, rather than one, and with all this geopolitical vectors from their direct feedback.

Three strategies of integration of Ukraine

As such, the situation in the move towards the creation of a Eurasian Union, if this goal is not an ordinary good wishes or campaign rhetoric, but surely the purpose, based on the historical and political will and readiness to assist in this process harsh resources?
Based on the position of realism in international relations, it is possible to call a spade a spade and distribute a number of scenarios are not particularly consistent with the rules and norms of diplomatic correctness.

1st scenario: The division of Ukraine. Ukraine, as a government in today's borders is something completely new, does not have a deep-rooted historical tradition, and tearing her political contradictions reflect its artificial nature. Make a common national idea capable of uniting civilization on the basis of 2-mutually exclusive sociological and civilizational systems is very difficult, if not maybe. Related to this is the fickleness of Ukrainian politics and its grotesque and almost farcical nature.

Pioneers in the development of public ideas zapadentsy act, but its formulation stubbornly rejected societies in eastern and southern Ukraine. Because no idea and can not be constructed. And, most likely, will not work. Therefore it is possible to predict the disintegration of the country into two zones — west and south-east. In this case, the south-eastern zone is naturally embedded in the Eurasian alliance and the problem is solved.
Is there any prerequisites for such a turn of events? Certainly, there is, and in recent years, Ukraine has more than once stood on the brink of civilian conflict, especially after the "Orange Revolution."

Do RF lever to promote such a turn of affairs? Yes, and when necessary they can be made optional. If you treat the Eurasian integration with full responsibility, that such scenario can not be excluded.

2nd scenario: an easy game with a pragmatic management of Ukraine in order to convince him to take the integration project under the pressure of events o
r given the severe and tangible political, economic and energy benefits. This scenario could be bloodless, but the degree of probability would have increased in this case, if Ukraine was faced with a very severe socio-economic challenges. The economic crisis and the growing chaos in the European and global economies are doing this for the right conditions. If you wait for the right moment, the ability to trying not to make it easier, but worsen the difficulties, Kiev will be possible in such a situation, when no other option except for Eurasian integration, it just does not stay.

To implement this scenario, it should lead to a state of readiness inflated diplomatic services, enable detailed monitoring and analysis of geopolitical events, one way or another affect the Ukraine on a global or regional scale. Run the project working closely with the Ukrainian elites deploy network processes on the territory of Ukraine, like western, but with reverse geo-political character — in the direction of integration and rapprochement with Russia. Factor in energy, economic and legal pressure to play in this, of course, an important role, but we can not forget about the other multifactorial ability to influence — including through the social, scientific, cultural, educational, and other projects. It should be a real battle for Ukraine from the Russian Federation involving more gifted and passionary shots thrown on business integration.

You can not ignore the value of social problems, which can facilitate the implementation of these plans.
Third scenario (the most avant-garde) is to take the work very tightly with the core zapadenskogo Ukrainian nationalism, which by definition ideologically and laws of the genre can not be one hundred percent in agreement with the cultural values of liberalism, individualism, tolerance, multiculturalism, human rights ideology and other post-modern standards, dominant in modern Western society. West in recent decades has put every form of nationalism and collective identity is practically outlawed. National country together in a single civilian society. In such a situation, the construction of "Ukrainian nation" is a project entirely incomparable with Western liberal value system. For pragmatic reasons the Western and anti-Russian network effects support the Ukrainian nationalism, but in fact it is put outside the law (as well as all other forms of nationalism), as will the merger with Western society.
Ukrainian nationalism, as we beheld, is a major obstacle to the realization of the Eurasian integration project. But you can try to reincarnate poison lechuschee means, and the enemy — in the other. Eurasian alliance should be thought as a model that preserves the traditions and cultures of societies, ethnic groups and organic societies. As can be seen, the Ukrainians as identity can be preserved only in its structure, whereas in individualistic liberal European society, collective identity is rapidly subjected to erosion, and then it will be criminalized. Specifically, with this face national movements in Eastern Europe, are increasingly conscious that came out from under Russian control, they were just as sensitive to the situation, but now the owners of the new ideological, liberals who, but also suppress nationalism as earlier Russian ideological instance.

Ukraine as a challenge to the subsequent term of Putin's presidency

In the middle of these 3 strategies you can choose any one or two outright lead in parallel, and in particular the art of possession of the tools of foreign policy would be the standard for South American trying to move simultaneously in all directions at once. If this is applied fairly will, brain and perseverance, you can fully count on success.

Catching Ukrainian problem of many years, I faithfully recorded one event: Moscow has not yet made a decisive choice in favor of integration, do not put effort in this direction has not developed any effective structures to act rapidly and alternately. The whole policy was vacillating, from the hard pressure (as if we were talking about the ordinary economic rival) passed to unnecessary and unconditional concessions, with all this corruption schemes budget settling various crooks, political strategists really killed any hope of consistency, consistency, and efficiency. Valve and private agreements were the first persons and only one argument. It is logical in such a situation that today no thorough and outstanding success in this direction is made. And that's putting it mildly.

If the words of Putin's Eurasian Union had real content, the situation simply has to change. It's all easy enough: Our homeland, or engaged in the integration for real, or simulates the process. In the 2nd case, all things will exactly because the situation at the moment. If the decision is made, all in Russian-Ukrainian relations should change. In the most recent times.

Eurasian integration can be or do or not do. All of the perineum, elusive and containing within itself an internal contradiction scenario, actually, paralyzing activity in all directions, have exhausted themselves. For Putin, as the future president needs clear and alternately strategy; inertial limit the population votes for saving their country from disintegration and collapse of the first of the 2000s virtually exhausted. Putin needs something new, future-oriented, clear majority of the population, which is realized in turn, decisively, effectively. Eurasian integration — a worthy goal and severe historical challenge. Putin cope with this — he really enhance its legitimacy, it will create anew. Not cope — will continue to exploit an old awards and create for themselves, the country and we are with you very many problems.

Vorachivaetsya Putin to the Kremlin as Eurasian. And if his first appearance at the head of the country depended on whether he will stop the collapse of the Russian Federation and to prevent the repetition of the fate of the Soviet Union, then the second phenomenon logically become the touchstone of success of the integration of the post-Soviet space. If he cope with it, will go down in history as a noble ruler of the Russian Federation.

People only remember the stately affairs. And only the power and strength provide the governor glory, freedom, security and respect everyone, even enemies.

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
SQL - 45 | 0,945 сек. | 11.36 МБ