Russian Answer to EU- The Eurasian Union

[Yeekim]

I'm fairly sure the Baltic States would rather die screaming than joining the Soviet Union Eurasian Union again.

Your impression is correct.

I wish them all the best whatever path they choose.

Thank you

To me the EU's permanent exclusion of Russia undermines its credibility and ideological raison d'etre. The EU shouldn't be setting up an anti-Russian economic block on Russia's doorstep.

Exclusion of Russia from EU does not necessarily mean being "anti-Russian", no more than exclusion of USA is anti-American. Close cooperation does not require membership, after all. Also, I doubt Russian ambitions would allow them to feel happy in any union where they are not the presiding member.

 

[really]

I think the Russian people would gain more by trying to correct some of the problems in their own society / economy / democracy before trying to form a larger unit even if it is limited to trading.

But I suppose the two aren't mutually exclusive.

I just don't see them pushing through reforms under the guise of them being required to as part of membership of the new union.

 

[Leoreth]

To me the EU's permanent exclusion of Russia undermines its credibility and ideological raison d'etre. The EU shouldn't be setting up an anti-Russian economic block on Russia's doorstep.

Russia joins EU. One day later:

"The EU shouldn't be setting up an anti-Chinese block right at China's doorstep"

 

[Pangur Bán]

"The EU shouldn't be setting up an anti-Chinese block right at China's doorstep"

That's the slippery slope fallacy, and also misses the point about the EU being for Europe rather than "all of Europe except Russia". China, unlike Russia, is not a European country.

Exclusion of Russia from EU does not necessarily mean being "anti-Russian", no more than exclusion of USA is anti-American.

There's nothing much I can say if you actually think that is a good parallel. Maybe the EU leaders see detaching Ukraine and Belarus from the Russian politico-economic sphere as a neutral move towards Russia, but only if they are complete morons. And I don't think they are.

 

[Leoreth]

That's the slippery slope fallacy, and also misses the point about the EU being for Europe rather than "all of Europe except Russia". China, unlike Russia, is not a European country.

You jumped on the slippery slope by assuming that the European Union should include all European nations just because it has the word European in it. And Russia is for large parts not even a European country (although this is not the point I argue).

If Russia considers European enlargement into the former Eastern bloc a threat, so be it. I don't see why the EU should satisfy Russian paranoia by letting them join (assuming they even wanted to).

 

[aronnax]

How would a Federal European Union-like system work if one of the members contains 80% of the population?

I can't see this going past an economic stage, unless the Russian Federation decentralises it's share of voting power into it's various republics, krais and a number of their oblasts. Otherwise, this is going to be Russian incorporation rather than Eurasian Union.

Whether or not Kazakhstan and the other Central Asian Republics still wanted to be part of the U.S.S.R in 1991, they aren't going to let themselves be politically dominated in an unfair union.

 

[Pangur Bán]

You jumped on the slippery slope by assuming that the European Union should include all European nations just because it has the word European in it. And Russia is for large parts not even a European country (although this is not the point I argue).
.

That's not "jumping on a slippery slope" (whatever that means) ... that's the raison d'etre of the EU. And yes, everyone knows Russia owns Siberia.

 

[Virote_Considon]

How would a Federal European Union-like system work if one of the members contains 80% of the population?

I don't see what the problem would be. Hell, over 80% of the UK is in England*, yet the the UK itself still exists.

*according to a quick wiki check

 

[Yeekim]

There's nothing much I can say if you actually think that is a good parallel. Maybe the EU leaders see detaching Ukraine and Belarus from the Russian politico-economic sphere as a neutral move towards Russia, but only if they are complete morons. And I don't think they are.

I am afraid I don't quite understand your position any more. First you said that

Russians (+Belarusians and Ukrainians) should be encouraged think of themselves as European once again, not "Eurasians"; the EU is for Europe, not just France and Germany.

After that you said that acknowledging Ukraine and Belarus as potential members is a hostile move against Russia and all about "detaching them from its sphere of influence".

I mean, if you recognize that Russia seeks to maintain its own sphere of influence, seeing itself as competitor to EU, then I agree with you. But in that case, how can you blame EU for not treating them as potential member - since they clearly don't wish to be one?

On the other hand, if you support the idea of a single EU from Lisbon to Vladivostok, then how do you imagine preserving some sort of "Russian politico-economic sphere", off-limits to everyone else, within that?

Finally, I find it a tad offensive when Belarus and Ukraine are treated like they were some sort of appendage to Russia. After all, it should be for those countries themselves to decide, where they want to belong.

 

[Pangur Bán]

I mean, if you recognize that Russia seeks to maintain its own sphere of influence, seeing itself as competitor to EU, then I agree with you. But in that case, how can you blame EU for not treating them as potential member - since they clearly don't wish to be one?

On the other hand, if you support the idea of a single EU from Lisbon to Vladivostok, then how do you imagine preserving some sort of "Russian politico-economic sphere", off-limits to everyone else, within that?

Well, the EU as it stands is basically a trade guild that forces its members to obey a certain code of behaviour the French and Germans approve of, and give up certain political rights that Russia isn't going to give up. I entirely understand why those behind the EU come to act the way they act, but I don't approve of it. Even if Russian inclusion is impossible in the short or medium term, it should be a goal that people in the EU work for. They don't, but nonetheless wish to cut off Russia's geographical breathing space. This path alienates Russia, undermines the Union's ideological agenda, and increases the chances of war that everyone wants to avoid. If you'd told Bismarck or Metternich that we would one day have a "European" Union to promote economic ties and lower the changes of war that included all of Europe except Russia, they would have frowned, lowered their head and asked you nervously if you were joking.

Finally, I find it a tad offensive when Belarus and Ukraine are treated like they were some sort of appendage to Russia. After all, it should be for those countries themselves to decide, where they want to belong.

Well, this is your business. The reality is that these former Soviet countries, unlike your own, are so closely related culturally and politically that Russia will always be particularly sensitive about them. They are to Russia what Canada is to the US. You may not approve of this attitude, but this is the real world and we have to get used to it.

 

[Leoreth]

That's not "jumping on a slippery slope" (whatever that means) ... that's the raison d'etre of the EU. And yes, everyone knows Russia owns Siberia.

Says you. The raison d'etre of the EU is to work, which is already difficult enough in its current state. And just because peace in Europe was the main motivation to found the EU, it's not its sole purpose, even more so today. Furthermore, recent events should've proven that simply being part of the union doesn't prevent conflict.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Says you. The raison d'etre of the EU is to work, which is already difficult enough in its current state. And just because peace in Europe was the main motivation to found the EU, it's not its sole purpose, even more so today.

Well, I know that. I think you miss the point. I know but don't approve.

 

[Lone Wolf]

I doubt that Lukashenko and "Leader of the Nation" Nazarbayev would like an actual political union. (We already have a "state of Russia and Belarus" anyway). I see no reasons preventing an economical union, though. It may even turn out to be useful.

And it's not like Putin or whoever desperately want to be in the EU in the first place. And "Eurasianism/Eurasian civilisation" is an old Russian ideological theory that was developed by some Russian emigrees in 1920's. Ironically, it's also liked by current Communist party of Russia.

 

[ParkCungHee]

I thought Eurasianism was even older then that.
Partially used to justify Russian ambitions in the far east.

 

[warpus]

Even if Russian inclusion is impossible in the short or medium term, it should be a goal that people in the EU work for. They don't, but nonetheless wish to cut off Russia's geographical breathing space. This path alienates Russia, undermines the Union's ideological agenda, and increases the chances of war that everyone wants to avoid.

This is just paranoia on Russia's part. Nobody is cutting off Russia's anything - Russia's internal borders will never be touched by the EU unless Russia formally applies to the organization and gets accepted as a member.

What Russia has to do is quit being annoyed when its neighbours act in their own self interest. If Ukraine ever joins the EU it is not going to be an anti-Russian move. . but rather a pro-Ukrainian move. They are a sovereign nation and they can join whatever international organization they want, it's none of Russia's business.

If Russia is going to get alienated, then that's pretty petty and not the EU's fault. It's like an annoying bully at the playground screaming to two guys: "You guys are friends now?? But we were friends first! This is not acceptable!"

 

[Dachs]

I thought Eurasianism was even older then that.
Partially used to justify Russian ambitions in the far east.

yeah this

although you can kinda see elements of it in russia's approaches to the qing and the increasing tendency by historians to treat muscovy-russia as another of the chinggisid successor states

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

How does this proposal differ from the CIS already in place?

 

[Lone Wolf]

yeah this
although you can kinda see elements of it in russia's approaches to the qing and the increasing tendency by historians to treat muscovy-russia as another of the chinggisid successor states

I was under the impression that while these ideas themselves were old, they were systematised by prince Trubetskoy et al. in 1920's.

Mackinder's theories about world history being expressed in a fight between "thallassocraties" and "tellurocraties" played a part here too.

 

[Winner]

As our former president said (let me paraphrase him):

"Russia's biggest problem is that it isn't sure where it begins and where it ends"

Anyway, I don't see any serious competition to the EU from any Russian-led bloc, at least so long as this bloc exists merely as Kremlin's tool to keep other countries from pursuing independent foreign policies.

Russia will one day be a part of Europe, just as one day it will give its people true democracy and justice.

 

[Yeekim]

"Russia's biggest problem is that it isn't sure where it begins and where it ends"

This, of course, being merely a common manifestation of two underlying problems: roads and fools.