From V. Putin's article in "Izvestia" from October 3 2011 years:
“For example, the two largest associations of our continent - the European Union and the emerging Eurasian Union - basing their interaction on the rules of free trade and compatibility of regulatory systems, objectively, including through relations with third countries and regional structures, can extend these principles to the whole space - from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. On the space that will be harmonious in its economic nature, but polycentric in terms of specific mechanisms and management decisions. Then it will be logical to start a constructive dialogue about the principles of interaction with the states of the Asia-Pacific Region, North America and other regions. ”
That is the scope of Comrade Putin. And further:
“I am convinced that the creation of the Eurasian Union, effective integration is the path that will allow its participants to take a worthy place in the difficult world of the 21st century. Only together can our countries be among the leaders of global growth and civilizational progress, to achieve success and prosperity. ”
Unlikely sharing the faith of Comrade Putin in the successful future of the new integration colossus, in the year 2011, the State Department was not particularly worried. But today Mrs. Clinton has already forgotten about the “clay feet” and is sounding the alarm. 6 December a newspaper correspondent quoted her words Financial Times Charles Clover. The main keynote of the statements Clinton became anti-Soviet - in the literal sense. The main thing in her words is the statement that the United States should prevent the “re-Sovietization” conducted by the Kremlin under the guise of economic integration.
A formidable statement was made on purpose in Dublin, before meeting with Russian Foreign Minister comrade Lavrov. The US Secretary of State said:
“There is no difference what it is called. This may be called the Customs Union, the Eurasian Union, and in the same spirit further. But let's not be mistaken about this. We know what the goal is, and we will try to find effective ways to slow down or prevent it. ”
Mrs. Clinton also said that the efforts aimed at regional hegemony by pro-Moscow regimes in the former Soviet Union are accompanied by new campaigns of repression.
She did not explain exactly what she had in mind who was strangled, persecuted, accused of dissent, made a prison landing for political reasons, was expelled from the country or put in a psychiatric hospital, but made it clear: America against the Eurasian Union will object. Hillary Clinton, who knows two things for sure - Assad should leave and there will be no revival of the USSR - does not believe V. Putin, who says:
“It’s not about re-creating the USSR in one form or another. It is naive to try to restore or copy what is already left in the past, but close integration on a new value, political, economic basis is the imperative of our time. ”
Mr Andrew Weiss, under President Bill Clinton who worked for the National Security Council and now working at the Rand Corporation think tank, agrees that Putin, returning to the Kremlin as president, plans to focus on strengthening Russia's influence. But, according to the analyst, the elite in neighboring states does not show much enthusiasm in the transfer of independence and sovereignty to Moscow.
The progress in integration, as Charles Clover sees it, is rather modest. After more than a decade of false starts, the Customs Union, formed from Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan in January 2010, received a “common economic space” in January 2012, due ultimately to ensure the free movement of goods, services and capital through a single market.
“It is regrettable,” says H. Clinton, “that after twenty years of the post-Soviet era ... many of the indicators of progress that we wanted are receding ... We are trying to fight it, but it is very difficult."
So, according to H. Clinton, the idea of the Eurasian Union is a "re-Sovietization of the region." At the same time, this means that the Department of State recognized: the Customs Union and EurAsEC are working projects, and they have an integration future, despite assurances from Mr. Weiss’s brain attack aircraft.
For example, Dmitry Suslov, deputy director of the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies, believes that the United States does not have the tools to weaken successful associations. is he believesthat the post-Soviet integration corresponds to the vital interests of the participating countries and is characterized by positive economic achievements.
And the Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Constitutional Legislation and State Building, Dmitry Vyatkin, believes that with her statement Hillary Clinton only confirmed the way of thinking typical for the US leadership:
“This vector of American foreign policy applies not only to Russia, but also to all countries. Divide and conquer - this principle is valid at all times. Of course, integration in the post-Soviet space is beneficial to the former Soviet republics and the peoples who live there. Of course, this course is inconvenient for the United States, because it creates a structure that is economically and politically powerful. Military cooperation will be developed, able to resist America’s plans to extend its influence, in particular, to Central Asia. The US is unprofitable to strengthen Russia, unprofitable strengthening of the former Soviet republics. It is beneficial for Washington to bleed them and loosen them one by one. So, we are moving in the right direction, which means that integration needs to be strengthened. ”
The United States is not going to abandon the inertial course of hegemony. Washington is able to agree with the existence of middling and weakling players on the world stage, but it does not need strong countries. If China gets stronger, the US changes its “defense” priorities and tightens its forces in the APR. If Russia becomes stronger, Clinton immediately draws attention to the Eurasian plans.
Not knowing how to harm the creation of the EAU, in the West give one pessimistic prophecy after another. Not only is Weiss skeptical about the future of the Eurasian Union, but he is also ridiculed by such a well-known, one might say terry, political scientist like Z. Brzezinski.
In his opinionVladimir Putin has made himself a hostage to imperial nostalgia, committed to the idea that Russia's greatness depends on the extent to which Moscow can revive and activate its former hegemony in the space of the former Soviet or Russian empire. Therefore, if Russia changes, it will not be under Putin, but after him. Changes in Russia will accelerate significantly after Putin leaves the stage. Now the political scientist sees a complete disappointment inside Russia.
As for the Eurasian Union, Brzezinski sees no prospects for him:
“... if you look at things realistically - who wants to join the Eurasian Union? I don't think the list will be long. Kazakhstan with Nazarbayev headed? Very doubtful. He is already maneuvering very well between Russia and China and the rest of the world. Karimov and Uzbekistan? Even less chance - Uzbekistan is very firm in matters of state independence. What about Yanukovych? There was a promising chance, but as it turned out, Yanukovych and his financial sponsors are more interested in identifying their own territory almost as much as the gang. And they do not want another gang to occupy their territory. ”
Lukashenko, according to the political scientist, is approximately in the same position as Yanukovych.
Therefore, Russia and Kazakhstan and Belarus do not need the EAU. And who is needed? A need - the West. A key factor in Russia's success, its path to prosperity, of course, is rapprochement with the West, Zbigniew Brzezinski believes.
True, he forgot that the Gorbachev and Yeltsin era was gone, and now is not the time to talk about the union of Russia with the West. The end of the eighties and nineties showed how the United States and Europe can be friends. In addition, today's America, with its “values”, is far less popular all over the world than after the victory in the “cold war”. Hardly that - in the Middle East and North Africa, the American embassies begin to destroy and to burn the striped flags. Islamism triumphantly triumphant during the Arab spring, as if contrary to the goals of the White House. The rhetoric of H. Clinton or Obama, who recently endorsed the “Magnitsky Act,” is an attempt to act in the same vein in which America went during the post-Bulbian period stories. But this is a policy from the past ...
Today, Comrade Putin in Europe can put Van Rompuy or Barroso (on the gas issue) in his place, and tomorrow he will watch Hillary answer to Bengazi’s death on September 11 in Benghazi.
It is not for her or Obama to teach Russia about integration, this difficult process. Once, the pro-Western liberals broke the USSR and took the path of selling titanium spades, wild privatization, plundering of natural wealth, which Clinton now announces "progress." Now Moscow has a different task - to build. The creative acts, according to the logic of Clinton, are regress. And you need to stop them. Direct Russia on the road to progress.
And you, Hillary, and you, Zbigniew, and you, Barak, know: the idea of the Eurasian Union was put forward not by Comrade Putin, but by Nursultan Nazarbayev. And not in 2010, but in 1994. Its, so to speak, copyright. And to say that Kazakhstan does not need it, at least, is naive.
It must be recalled that Nazarbayev has never been such an EAU supporter who would have advocated the "unity of command" of Moscow. On the contrary, he spoke of the equal rights of all members of the future Union. “Our states have approximately equal conditions and wishes of the elite ...” - here’s words Nazarbayev.
A year ago, the president of Kazakhstan сказал:
“We consider the Eurasian Union as an open project. It cannot be imagined without broad interaction, for example, with the European Union and other associations.
There is no “restoration” or “reincarnation” of the USSR, nor will there be. These are just phantoms of the past, speculation and speculation. And in this, our views with the leadership of Russia, Belarus and other countries completely coincide. ”
There is no “restoration” or “reincarnation” of the USSR, nor will there be. These are just phantoms of the past, speculation and speculation. And in this, our views with the leadership of Russia, Belarus and other countries completely coincide. ”
Very precise words that could well be addressed to Hillary Clinton, the living ghost of the Cold War.
Victorian Medvedchuk, a Ukrainian politician and leader of the Ukrainian Choice Public Movement, sees the future of the Eurasian Union as positive. is he offers it as an alternative to the “shopkeeper’s mindset”:
“The market does not know how to take care of the complex development of various sectors of the economy. Private capital goes only where it can make a profit. Therefore, the main task of the new association of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan is the creation of the fullest possible production chains included in the common technological system of the Eurasian Union and covering the maximum possible number of industries. ”
The economic and political benefits for themselves were found in the EAU and Transnistria. The Foreign Minister of this unrecognized republic, Nina Shtanski, addressing the participants of the Eurasia Readings conference held in Moscow, saidthat joining the Eurasian Union could be a way out of political stalemate for Transnistria:
“The emerging Eurasian Union has identified real prospects for Transnistrians to overcome the political impasse associated with the unresolved relations with Moldova.”
At the Shtanski Conference noted thethat the idea of the Eurasian Union gave Transnistrians "the hope that peace and stability will come to our land forever." She emphasized:
“We also see that Eurasian integration gives us a chance to transfer the economy to the mode of intensive development, to strengthen the social sphere of the state. Finding unity in the spiritual realm will certainly make us all stronger. That is why Eurasian integration was declared a national idea in Transnistria. This course has recently been consolidated in the Concept of the state’s foreign policy and is already beginning to take a visible shape. Transnistria intends to actively pursue its participation in the Eurasian integration process, but we need the help and support of our friends and associates in Russia, Kazakhstan, and Belarus. Temporary political conventions should not interfere with the process of our rapprochement in the spheres of economy and culture, security and social development. ”
Analyst "Centuries" Victor Pirozhenko считаетthat in the current competitive world with its challenges, the Eurasian Union will not be able to exist as a purely economic union. In his opinion, the economic motives of the Eurasian association alone cannot win a victory in a competitive geopolitical war. Therefore, we should talk about the development of "some redundant, going beyond the boundaries of the purely economic pragmatism, meanings."
The analyst calls such senses not only the restoration of a single economic space in the future, but also the development of the Eurasian ideology. An ideological approach (isn't Mrs. Clinton afraid of him?) Will create internal positive incentives to support the Eurasian project in the post-Soviet space in broad layers of society and will solve the important problem of the continuity of the course towards the development of EAU in the conditions of the inevitable change of ruling circles in the member states. In the creative process, it is necessary to neutralize the obstacles created by the West. At the same time, Eurasian integration should not only protect the identity of peoples as a value, but also form a model of harmonious coexistence of distinctive cultures and socio-political structures. A model that could become in the future which would become a universal model. And just under the conditions of the enforced planting in the world after the collapse of the USSR of the Western socio-economic model and the corresponding to it, the author points out, diversity, originality and the principle of justice will prove to be universal values being protected.
If it is appropriate to look for an alliance with America or the EU under market liberal benchmarks, then the EAU ideology can offer participants a “positive alternative to their defective nation-building or a stagnant European Union after the collapse of the USSR”. Otherwise, outside the ideological field, arguments about post-Soviet integration can be perceived "as an egoistic desire of Russian political and business circles to" seize "the resources of the CIS countries." Thus, the future of the EAU is to destroy the Western ideology of “democracy and human rights” by principles of diversity, originality and justice, which justifies the undermining of the values of state sovereignty, territorial integrity, non-interference, cultural and political identity, thereby making “liberal-democratic ideology irrelevant.
In this context, it is Russia that could serve as a guarantor of the protection of cultural and civilizational diversity.
November 4 "Eurasian Youth Union" and the party "Eurasia" announced the about the beginning of the preparation of the All-Russian referendum on the creation of the EAU. The plebiscite is scheduled for 2013 year. If Hillary Clinton had read this document, she would have sprinkled ashes on her head:
“The brotherly nations united first in the Russian Empire, and then in the Soviet Union, at the end of the last century were forcibly divided against their will: in 1991, a referendum was held to preserve the USSR. For the preservation of the Union voted 76% of voters. However, the referendum results were ignored, and as a result of the criminal actions of Yeltsin, Shushkevich and Kravchuk, the state ceased to exist ... "
Next:
“... taking into account the fact that it is impossible to cancel signed treaties on the termination of the USSR, on the one hand, and the desire of the peoples of Eurasia to unite in a union state, on the other hand, we consider it necessary to hold a new referendum meeting the changed historical conditions ...”
The statement of the organizing committee says that the main issue to be submitted to the referendum will be the creation of the Eurasian Union as a voluntary association of the Eurasian countries into a single state.
Repeat: a single state.
However, the authors of the statement clarify:
“We are not talking about the revival of the USSR or the Russian Empire in its previous form. The past does not return, but it is not necessary. Today there is a new project, which began almost a hundred years ago - the Eurasian Union. ”
Now the initiators of the union collect signatures. According to the law "On the referendum", 2 million signatures are required.
In addition to the initiators mentioned above, the project Support the People's Cathedral and Alexander Dugin. Judging by the number of participants in the V Kontakte group (2498), the referendum will not provide itself with the support of the audience. Hillary Clinton should not be afraid: the USSR is a monster from the past. No matter how “regressive” it is, it will not be reborn in its former form.
As for the new integration, the principles of originality and justice, if they were applied by the United States, would lead not to confrontation, conflicts and an irrepressible thirst for hegemony, but to the achievement of genuine values. I would like to believe that the voiced principles will be embodied in the EAU and will form the basis of its ideology, which would successfully compete with Washington's Machiavellian approach - “divide and rule”.
Observed and translated by Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
- especially for topwar.ru