«ЖЕСТКАЯ» СИЛА КАК «МЯГКИЙ» ИНСТРУМЕНТ ВНЕШНЕЙ ПОЛИТИКИ РОССИИ В ЕВРАЗИИ
The instruments used by Russia to achieve integration have changed - today this policy relies more on hard power. At the same time the objectives of Russian policy have not changed, they predominantly geo-economic, not geopolitical.
The paper examines the theoretical framework for the analysis of contemporary processes of international integration. Thet author applies methodological apparatus of different theories to the analysis of the process of regional integration. This research allows to get closer to understanding the possibility of forming a political union in the Eurasian region.
This article provides a historical background and analysis of Turkey soft power policy, its concept and tools. Turkey’s use of soft power in Eurasian countries is facilitated by its history and position at the intersection between Europe and Asia, as well as ethnic, religious and linguistic communities on its territory. Over the last two decades, complex internal and external factors have transformed its soft power policy and enhanced its influence in the countries where it has geopolitical interests, especially in Caucasus and Central Asia. The main external factor was the formation of new independent states after the collapse of the USSR in 1991. Turkey’s foreign policy approach was transformed by the rise to power of the centre-right conservative Justice and Development Party in 2002. Democratic reforms reduced the military’s influence over foreign policy, strengthened civil society and increased the active participation of actors such as business and civil society organizations in foreign policy. In addition foreign affairs minister Ahmet Davutoğlu’s new approach of “Zero Problems with Our Neighbours,” based on the doctrine of strategic depth (Stratejik Derinlik) and using political dialogue, economic interdependence and cultural harmony, reinforced Turkish soft power. Moreover, protests in the Middle East and North Africa led to a consideration of the Turkish state model as an example to be followed. Another important factor was Turkey’s participation in various international institutions.
The efficient use of soft power strategies, tools and activities in language promotion, education and scientific cooperation, business collaboration and development assistance by Turkish diplomats and experts in international relations has resulted in a positive and attractive international image of Turkey. Turkey implements its soft power policy through bilateral and multilateral cooperation. For example, it established the Cooperation Council of Turkic-Speaking States (CCTS), the Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries (TURKPA) and the Joint Administration of Turkic Culture and Art (TÜRKSOY) to increase collaboration with target countries.
Despite of the positive outcomes from soft power, Turkey needs a multidimensional strategy to promote its influence abroad that takes into account key foreign policy objectives such as negotiations with the European Union and decreasing tensions with Syria and Cyprus.
This paper attempts to ascertain the role of public diplomacy in the East Asian region and focuses on the civilization potentials of Russia and China in the region. Dialogue of civilizations, based not on conflict of cultures, values, but on movement to mutual understanding, collaboration and even to the process of harmonization of civilization, is becoming a major requirement of our time. All efforts to solve difficult international problems by “hard power” are not successfully completed – use of military force provokes a counter response. In the light of this, the role of public diplomacy and foreign-policy propaganda is increasing. Despite the fact that the world’s financial and economic crises dispelled the myth of universality of the Western liberal-economic model, USA still continues to impose her ideology – “the new rules of the world ” – on the world. Under these conditions, Russia and China are facing a challenge – consolidating their positions in the world economy and politics. Nowadays, without doubts, both Russia and China are interested in the integration approach. This study explores the possibility of working out the paradigm of political and diplomatic cooperation between the two countries.
The present world order that restricts the possibilities of individual civilizations causes reaction from East-Asian and other developing countries. China in particular, is taking the lead among developing countries, disputing regional and recently global positions. While China assumes responsibility as a regional leader, Russia has interests in her age-old region – Commonwealth of Independent States.
The EU as a model of soft power has a powerful attraction in the world and even a much more influential one in its near abroad. The EU has an interest in promoting its model as a contribution to good governance, democracy, economic prosperity and security, which are essential pre-requisites to and effective regional cooperation framework. It also has a major interest in continuing to preach the merits of sharing sovereignty as a necessary condition to tackling many of today's global problems such as sustainable development, poverty, the environment, transnational crime, and more recently, the economic crisis. Since its inception, the EU has also become the largest trading block and aid provider in the world which gives even more weight to its international role.
European Union is on the crossroad in its relationship with BRICS. It must not fail to make a good choice. Different scenarios of relationship are feasible. The most probable are discussed in the paper. The author shows that the competition scenario will damage interests of the European Union and its member-states. She strongly lobbies a choice for cooperation scenario, showing it benefits for the both sides and world development. At the same time she urges to overcome existing prejudices, disbelieves and lack of trust.
The recent crisis in Ukraine cast a spotlight on those countries located between Russia and the EU, a region that had long existed beneath the radar of international politics. Indeed, even its name remains indeterminate: the term 'post-Soviet' is too encompassing (it could also designate Estonia or Tajikistan) while the notion of 'Eastern Europe' has long lost any geographical anchor. Instead, this space is often named after regional powers’ attempts to shape it: as the EU’s 'Eastern Neighbourhood' or as Russia’s 'Near Abroad'. The new region-building endeavour pursued by Russia through Eurasian integration frameworks is a crucial development in this regard.
On the 29 of May 2014, Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan signed the Treaty establishing the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), which extends the provisions of the existing Eurasian Customs Union (ECU) and comes into being in 2015. This integration regime has been lauded by Russian President Vladimir Putin as a new, better version of the European Union, and castigated by US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton as a new form of the Soviet Union. This report shows that it is neither. The EEU is a modern and far-reaching attempt at economic integration, but one that is weakened by internal and conceptual contradictions. What was designed as a geo-economic framework is increasingly becoming a geopolitical issue. In attempting to counter the influence of the EU’s alternative integration regime (the Eastern Partnership), Russia has shifted its diplomacy from persuasion to coercion, and Moscow is increasingly resorting to using the EEU as a foreign policy tool. The countries of the entredeux – literally, something placed between two things – are being forced to face to a geopolitical choice they had been trying to avoid, or at least to defuse. Divisive domestic politics, separatism, structural dependencies and the economic and political calculations of internal actors are key factors mediating and complicating their choice. This report focuses on these issues that are too often overlooked in the debate on Russia-EU regional competition.