Russian Answer to EU- The Eurasian Union

[Mad Man]

Why the hell dose everyone keep bringing up Ukraine? The last time I cheeked Ukraine was happy to be rid of Russia and was moving forward towards it's own identity. Serbia on the other hand would be a more realistic inclusion to this union.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Why the hell dose everyone keep bringing up Ukraine? The last time I cheeked Ukraine was happy to be rid of Russia and was moving forward towards it's own identity. Serbia on the other hand would be a more realistic inclusion to this union.

In a word, it's not. Especially given the large amounts of ethnic Russians living in eastern Ukraine.

 

[RedRalph]

Why the hell dose everyone keep bringing up Ukraine? The last time I cheeked Ukraine was happy to be rid of Russia and was moving forward towards it's own identity. Serbia on the other hand would be a more realistic inclusion to this union.

Last time you checked was about 2005 then, and you didn't check very thoroughly

 

[Winner]

Why the hell dose everyone keep bringing up Ukraine? The last time I cheeked Ukraine was happy to be rid of Russia and was moving forward towards it's own identity. Serbia on the other hand would be a more realistic inclusion to this union.

Which is why they are trying so hard to get into the EU...?

 

[Leoreth]

Panslavism is so 19th century ...

 

[Lone Wolf]

Unfortunately, the Western diseases of liberasty, tolerasty and demock-crazy had corrupted many of our Slavic brethen, the bearers of Orthodox Civilization that resists the Western Mammon-worshipping and degenerate materialism.

 

[GoodGame]

My first thought was what will the Ukraine do? I think the Ukraine would choose to be with the EU, at least by association if not by name.

 

[Leoreth]

Really depends on how their domestic politics swing over the next years. The country's still pretty divided. Currently I can't see them preferring the EU with the lukewarm response they get over here, all the while being on Russia's short leash that is its gas pipeline.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Ideally, Ukraine should try to force themselves in the middle, as a neutral nation.

They'll never join the EU, not as long as they are reliant on Russian pipelines.

 

[Snorrius]

Panslavism is so 19th century ...

Well, considering that Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan do not really fit into Panslavic theme and Poland will (hopefully) never become the member of this great union, it is not about Panslavism at all...

 

[Leoreth]

I was talking about the allegations that Serbia should be part of this "great" union, too.

 

[Pangur Bán]

The EU is already the world's largest economy and could easily become a superpower if the political will was there. Including Russia -after some serious reforms- would be advantageous but not necessary, and they are currently in no state to join.

The EU's lack of various strategic resources makes its economy nothing but a a liability. Think of a Civ 4 city with lots of wonders and gold, but no oil or units. When it comes down to it, a good banking system, strong services sector, and so on are all well and good, but you need weapons, friends and resources to be a serious power that can defend itself and threaten others.

Ultimately, EU countries and Russian countries need each other in the longer term ... in the mean time we need to minimize rifts.

I don't think treating Ukraine and Belarus as sovereign nations is disrespectful of Russia. It has NOTHING to do with Russia.

If Ukraine joined the EU Russia would throw a hissy fit, of course, but it wouldn't lead to any sort of war or refusal to to deliver oil.

They are independent nations, they can join whatever organization they want.

The powerful countries of the world all have interests they will pursue. What matters here is how Russia sees it, not you. In reality you must respect countries like Russia in order to get along with them.

 

[Leoreth]

The EU's lack of various strategic resources makes its economy nothing but a a liability. Think of a Civ 4 city with lots of wonders and gold, but no oil or units. When it comes down to it, a good banking system, strong services sector, and so on are all well and good, but you need weapons, friends and resources to be a serious power that can defend itself and threaten others.

Well, first, the real world is not a Civ4 game.

Second, the producing EU countries will always need resources and Russia will always need someone to export theirs too. Trade treaties are of mutual interest here. A political union is not, and I don't know why it should be.

European political ideals are in enough trouble currently, so we don't really need a barely concealed autocracy within the union to make things even worse.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Well, first, the real world is not a Civ4 game.

You don't say! It's a good job there are guys like you on forums like this to give us all reality checks!

Second, the producing EU countries will always need resources and Russia will always need someone to export theirs too. Trade treaties are of mutual interest here. A political union is not, and I don't know why it should be.

European political ideals are in enough trouble currently, so we don't really need a barely concealed autocracy within the union to make things even worse.

Well arguably a big problem with the current EU is that it's been hijacked by political ideologues and is no longer as economically orientated as once it was.

 

[Leoreth]

You don't say! It's a good job there are guys like you on forums like this to give us all reality checks!

If you're aware of that, why do you make bad analogies that fail at first glance?

Well arguably a big problem with the current EU is that it's been hijacked by political ideologues and is no longer as economically orientated as once it was.

Um, what? The EU was always mainly a political project. In its early years its only objective was to foster understanding between countries that were at war with each other only years before. Economic integration started with war-relevant industries like steel manufacturing for that very reason.

If anything, you could say that the EU began to be hijacked by economic interests over time (and that was before the Euro crisis even). Germany's to blame for that too. Unfortunately the economic problems are more urgent at the moment so solutions to the political problems that are more important to the unit.

Short: The EU is not the European NAFTA equivalent and if Russia intends to join only based on that angle, it all the more proves that they have no place in it.

 

[Pangur Bán]

If you're aware of that, why do you make bad analogies that fail at first glance?

I'm not aware of anything wrong with the analogy, other than it being an analogy.

Um, what? The EU was always mainly a political project. In its early years its only objective was to foster understanding between countries that were at war with each other only years before. Economic integration started with war-relevant industries like steel manufacturing for that very reason.

If anything, you could say that the EU began to be hijacked by economic interests over time (and that was before the Euro crisis even). Germany's to blame for that too. Unfortunately the economic problems are more urgent at the moment so solutions to the political problems that are more important to the unit.

Short: The EU is not the European NAFTA equivalent and if Russia intends to join only based on that angle, it all the more proves that they have no place in it.

Yeah, most countries join the EU to get the economic benefits. The ideological stuff loved by Germany and, when convenient, France, is simply tolerated by everyone else.

You also have to remember that for places like Russia, Germany has a poor track record at exporting ideological fronts to economic expansion. First you have anti-Orthodox "crusading" in the ole middle ages, then you have that lovely plan back in the 40s to evict all of the country's "sub-human" population to give land for the morally and racially superior Germans. Not everyone in Europe wiped their memory clean in 1945.

 

[Leoreth]

Yeah, most countries join the EU to get the economic benefits. The ideological stuff loved by Germany and, when convenient, France, is simply tolerated by everyone else.

That's a convenient oversimplification. While I don't disagree about economic aspects, they're far from being the only one. Especially in case of the Central European and Iberian countries, integration into the EU was also very important to get out of their previous blocks or isolation, respectively, and to prove their new status as respectable democracies.

You also have to remember that for places like Russia, Germany has a poor track record at exporting ideological fronts to economic expansion. First you have anti-Orthodox "crusading" in the ole middle ages, then you have that lovely plan back in the 40s to evict all of the country's "sub-human" population to give land for the morally and racially superior Germans. Not everyone in Europe wiped their memory clean in 1945.

Interesting that you go on the Germany angle in a discussion about the EU/Russia relation, by the way. Running out of arguments? I don't want to join the "who's worse" competition here but it's not as if half of Europe doesn't remember Russia's efforts to impose their ideology on them.

All that is ignoring that Germany is easily the EU country with the best relations to Russia at the moment.

 

[Pangur Bán]

That's a convenient oversimplification. While I don't disagree about economic aspects, they're far from being the only one. Especially in case of the Central European and Iberian countries, integration into the EU was also very important to get out of their previous blocks or isolation, respectively, and to prove their new status as respectable democracies.
.

The political elites in these countries are as bad or good as they were before. These elites had just been milking their own people, but since they've been milking the EU as well ... now you are paying. You Germans again let ideololgical fantasy get in the way of good hard economic and political reality.

That's a convenient oversimplification. While I don't disagree about economic aspects, they're far from being the only one. Especially in case of the Central European and Iberian countries, integration into the EU was also very important to get out of their previous blocks or isolation, respectively, and to prove their new status as respectable democracies.

Interesting that you go on the Germany angle in a discussion about the EU/Russia relation, by the way. Running out of arguments? I don't want to join the "who's worse" competition here but it's not as if half of Europe doesn't remember Russia's efforts to impose their ideology on them.

All that is ignoring that Germany is easily the EU country with the best relations to Russia at the moment.

The line of argument I'm involved in is the EU's Russia relations. Yes, who is behind the EU and what they've done matters.

 

[Leoreth]

The political elites in these countries are as bad or good as they were before. These elites had just been milking their own people, but since they've been milking the EU as well ... now you are paying. You Germans again let ideololgical fantasy get in the way of good hard economic and political reality.

Again you turn reality on its head. If anything it's Germany (especially since the Merkel government) that puts hard economic facts before everything else, including the political cooperation between its members you try to denounce as insignificant and only wanted by Germany in this thread. And I say that with all self-criticism this entails (because I don't represent the German government and think it makes a mistake in this kind of behaviour).

The line of argument I'm involved in is the EU's Russia relations. Yes, who is behind the EU and what they've done matters.

So, what? The EU is only Germany's vehicle for its ideological agenda? I've heard this accusation before only in context of Germany's economic agenda (which at least makes some sense from a superficial point of view that disregards both the EU's and Germany's history within it). On the other hand, you say that economic interests are the only thing that could unite Europe and Russia in any case.

So what's your actual argument?

 

[Pangur Bán]

If anything it's Germany (especially since the Merkel government) that puts hard economic facts before everything else, including the political cooperation between its members you try to denounce as insignificant and only wanted by Germany in this thread. And I say that with all self-criticism this entails (because I don't represent the German government and think it makes a mistake in this kind of behaviour).

Not sure I follow. The economic benefits of allowing basket-case book-cooking kleptocracies into the Franco-German currency zone allude me.

So, what? The EU is only Germany's vehicle for its ideological agenda? I've heard this accusation before only in context of Germany's economic agenda (which at least makes some sense from a superficial point of view that disregards both the EU's and Germany's history within it). On the other hand, you say that economic interests are the only thing that could unite Europe and Russia in any case.

So what's your actual argument?

Never said anything like that. If you actually read my posts rather than becoming so defensive and ignoring their content, you'll see I'm talking about relations-management.