Евразийский экономический союз: достижения и перспективы
The article aims to conceptualize the economic model of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), to fi nd similarities with the European Union single market model, to identify critical remarks on the part of the EU, to estimate the perspectives of integration in a wide space from Lisbon to Vladivostok, Astana and Bishkek. The author comes to the following conclusions. 1) The EAEU complies with canons formed by the EU and is being built with due regard to the European integration experience. The common external tariff, the “four freedoms” of the internal market and principles of its organization – the prohibition of discrimination, harmonization, mutual recognition of standards, conformity mark, common sectoral policies, logic of neofunctionalism – all these regulation elements are present in both models. 2) Russia considers cooperation with the EU as positive, because it has gained regulation methods for the traditionally controlled market and strengthened its global position due to this cooperation. 3) The EU makes a signifi cant indirect impact on the Eurasian integration through criticism and expansion of peculiar approaches. Part of the criticism is of temporary or politicized character. 4) The EAEU has a strong starting idea – common history, common genetics and the need to preserve achievements in exploration and development of the vast Eurasian space. 5) An opportunity for interaction between the EU and the EAEU derives from the convergence of regulatory systems. However, high degree of state participation in economies of the EAEU countries, which distinguishes the Eurasian model from the European one and has become an irritant in the EU–EAEU relations, will continue to hinder “the integration of integrations”.
This volume analyzes the evolution of geo-political and economic integration in the Eurasian area. The Eurasian integration is a growing phenomenon and the largest scale analysis proves necessary to avoid simplistic judgments based only on the geo-political approach. The editors of this publication present different profiles of integration, such as the geo-political and constitutional aspect, the relations with the European Union, migration issues, energy flows, the compatibility between the Eurasian and the WTO law, and the comparison with the European integration model. The book presents a wide range of viewpoints through essays of specialists from Russia, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, Italy, France.
The monograph reflects on the dynamics of the EU role in global governance processes, presents analysis of the methods and instruments the EU employs for achieving its objectives in the international arenas, models and options of multilateral partnerships. The EU’s evolving role and influence in the G7/G8 over the last ten years reflecting its growth in power and influence as well as the EU expanding community competencies and legal authority is specifically explored, as an area which so far has not been sufficiently investigated. The work is tracing the transformation of the EU identity as a global actor in the recent decade and looks into how these changes affect the EU – Russia relationship. The book adds value to the scholarly literature in the field of studying the EU as a global actor. The contributions aim to serve as a reference and analysis for academics and students in the fields of political science, economics, law and other disciplines. The work aspires to be helpful to government officials, financial institutions, research libraries, the news media, and to members of the interested public.
In the next two years, the UK will be faced with a complicated geopolitical situation. The relations with its two key partners – the EU and the USA – will be changed. The USA, when dealing with European issues, will begin to rely on Germany rather than on the UK. It will be necessary to negtiate with the EU a new relationship model that will envisage that the UK should not participate in the decision-making process inside the European Union, and should have no internal inﬂuence there. Simultaneously, there will be a need for negotiations on new trade agreements with a number of countries that are not EU member states, because the UK, once it has withdrawn from the US, will automatically ﬁ nd itself outside of the international trade agreements concluded on behalf of the EU, including those in the framework of the WTO.
For the first time since World War II, the U.S. seem to lose leadership at the multilateral trade talks shifting accents to bilateral and regional trade cooperation. The main reason for the shift is a deadlock at the WTO Doha-round negotiations where the U.S. face opposition of the steadily growing economies of India, China and Brazil.
Торговые переговоры, ГАТТ, ВТО, США, многосторонняя торговая система, ЕС, Япония, ИНДИЯ, КИТАЙ, Бразилия, Дж. Буш-мл., Б. Обама, М. Баррозу, Р. Зеллик, П. Лами, Р. Кирк, Л. да Силва, Карел де Гюхт, АТЭС, НАФТА, АСЕАН, трансатлантическое партнерство, "двадцатка", trade talks, GATT, WTO, U.S., Multilateral Trading System, Eu, Japan, India, China, Brazil, G.-W. Bush, B. Obama, M. Barrozo, R. Zoellick, P. Lamy, R. Kirk, L. da Silva, Karel de Gucht, APEC, NAFTA, ASEAN, Transatlantic Partnership, G 20