"Большая Евразия" и ШОС: миропорядок, безопасность и борьба с терроризмом
Against the backgroundof common geo-economic and geopolitical veies related to the development and arrangement of the Erurasian continent.
The development of the Eurasian Union is becoming increasingly dynamic in the economy, trade and geopolitics. However, its potential is far from being exhausted. The article elaborates what tasks the EAEU should solve in order to remain in demand as an integration bloc.
In 2018 Russia assumed the position of the chaircountry in the Eurasian Economic Union and that gives the chance to outline new perspectives for the sectorial and general integration trends.
In May 2019 we will celebrate the fifth anniversary of the signing of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the 25th anniversary of the idea of modern Eurasian integration. Since then, the Eurasian Economic Union established itself as a quite successfully developing, open and attractive integration block, which has indeed become the indisputable reality of the economic processes in Eurasia. Perhaps enough time has passed so that we might begin to think about a “theory of Eurasian integration” in itself, as well as to outline its potential contents.
Integration processes in the EAEU is associated with the development of regional banking regulation that secures the effectiveness of the integration policy and, ultimately, financial stability. The integrity of the regional regulatory mechanism will largely depend on the effectiveness of convergence and supranationalization of the economic and institutional aspects of banking regulation of the EAEU member states, and at the same time – on their synchronization with Basel III. In this regard, a regional regulatory mechanism – mini Basel III – should become the central core of the EAEU regulatory and supervisory system, a tool for mitigation of systemic risks, and a mean for maintenance of stress resilience of the national banking sectors, as well as a channel of interaction with international banking regulation authorities.
However, currently EAEU banking regulation lacks a complete framework, mostly due to the shortage of strategic vision on regulatory convergence and poor understanding of the integration risks due to the absence of reliable tools for measuring imbalances in the banking sector. Besides, a number of issues of institutional supranationalization, including the delegation of the regulatory power from national to supranational level, still remain open.
In this work, the author continues the study of the regionalization of banking regulation and supervision in the EAEU focusing on systemic risks and how the mini-Basel III mechanism could become a key tool in minimization of the system-wide instability and crises.
The governments of the member states of the Eurasian Economic Union should set an ambitious goal of creating a powerful, innovative and competitive union-wide complex of the rare earth industry. Its implementation is ideally suited as one of the "flagship" projects of the EAEU, which are now actively discussing and looked for in the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC) and in the scientific expert community of the Union countries. Moreover, there are a lot of strong arguments in favor of the success of the development of the union-wide complex of the rare earth industry.
On 15 March 2019, the first “Connecting Eurasia Dialogue: From the Atlantic to the Pacific” was held in Brussels, at Europe’s political heart. The event was organized by the Roscongress Foundation and the Conoscere Eurasia Association with the support of the Association of European Businesses and the Belgian-Luxembourg Chamber of Commerce. Amid the current political cooldown, this was a unique gathering, enabling a high-level dialogue on trade, economic, and integration issues among stakeholders from the wider Eurasian space, including the European Union (EU), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and China. The focus of high-level policy makers and top business executives attended the Dialogue was on challenges and opportunities of the EU’s engagement with the EAEU, harmonization of soft infrastructure to enhance trans-Eurasian connectivity, and the EAEU’s single pharmaceutical market. This IIASA discussion paper provides a summary of the deliberations, supported by research from inside and outside the Institute.
A special issue of the interstate journal "The Bulletin of the economy of the Eurasian Union", devoted to the priorities of the second five-year agenda of the EAEU.
The institutional aspect of the post-crisis banking regulation reform (Basel III) still remains unsettled, and as such undermines regulators’ efforts in shaping a seamless platform for international financial intermediation. On the other hand, lack of perspectives for global acceptance of the Basel III standards amid internationalization of banking activities is one of the main reasons of regulatory asymmetries that are difficult to handle at the national level. Under these circumstances, efforts of the governments and financial regulators are a central core of their policy in protecting banking sectors from systemic risks: It becomes imperative to bring together national mechanisms of banking regulation and to develop a regional system of regulatory institutions, as is evidenced by the single supervisory mechanism in the euro area countries.
Strengthening stress-resilience of the national banking sectors in the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and expansion of banking activities to the Eurasian economic integration will require a conceptual framework of the EAEU banking regulation system. However, different regulatory regimes in the EAEU member states along with the lack of supranational regulatory institutions may slowdown the progress of the Eurasian mechanism of banking regulation. This means that operationalization of the EAEU regulatory mechanism will depend on whether the “mini-Basel III” format as a methodological hub of the regionalization and supranationalization will act as an enabler of resolution of the regulatory trilemma among the feasibility, relevance, and opportunities of supranationalization.
The institutional aspect of “mini-Basel III” is intrinsically linked to the integrity and consistency of the supranational authority for regulation of the EAEU financial markets being an authority documented in the Treaty on the EAEU; however, the costs of regulatory alignment may exceed the advantages of a single-institution regulatory architecture owing to the existent and tacit risks of heterogeneity of the national regulatory models. Stemming from the complex financial sector environment that falls short of valid and reliable institutional fundamentals, we propose alternative scenarios for the EAEU regulatory mechanism that could be sought for optimization of regulatory logistics and algorithms of regulatory alignment. Based on systematization of the benefits and weaknesses of each of the scenarios as well as on comparative analysis as to whether the proposed scenarios would ensure continuum of financial intermediation and financial stability, we found that currently there are no priority approaches to the design of a supranational institutional system in the EAEU. At the same time, identical structure of the national banking sectors together with the least expensive scenario approach could underpin the process of regulatory supranationalization; however, to secure integrity of the EAEU supranational authority, it should be complemented with an authority that would be responsible for coordination of the EAEU-wide regulatory alignment.
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.