Большое евразийское партнерство: возможное региональное влияние и интересы России
In this article the author analyzes the current state and prospects of integration associations and formats for multilateral economic cooperation in terms of implementing the initiative of the Greater Eurasian Partnership. The role of this initiative as an instrument of Russian policy is thoroughly examined and its potential is assessed for strengthening international cooperation in Eurasia. In particular, the possibilities of harmonizing key projects and initiatives within the framework of the idea of co-development of the continent's states are analyzed. The authors explore the potential of the largest multilateral formats in Eurasia, both in the economic sphere - the Comprehensive Regional Economic Partnership (CREP), the One-Belt-One Road Initiative (OBOR), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAU), etc.
A special focus is placed on the possibility of connecting Russia to multilateral economic (integration) projects in Eurasia in terms of advancing its strategic interests, as well as realizing the potential of the EEU as a structural pillar of Greater Eurasia institute. The conclusion is that the current state of regional economic institutions does not fully correspond to Russia's interests. In the economic sphere of "Greater Eurasia" there is an institutional congestion caused by the existence of a number of parallel developing integration initiatives and mechanisms for economic cooperation.
It is concluded that the strengthening of the EEU as the institutional core of the "Greater Eurasia" can become the basis for the formation of a balanced normative mega-space. However, the relatively small aggregate economic potential of the member states of the Union does not allow the EEU to be the largest economic pole and the leading center for the development of multilateral institutions in Greater Eurasia. The authors suggest that the solution to this contradiction could be the development of the Comprehensive Eurasian Partnership towards the interface of the EEU, the largest format for developing the rules of the international economic life in Asia, both to secure Russian interests and to strengthen international cooperation.
Foreign policy uses a wide range of soft power policy instruments and models. It is thus useful to identify the best practices, key tools and approaches that ensure the sustainability and coherence of policy, as well as the connecting elements that allow a country to coordinate its foreign policy actions. This article analyzes the experience of China, the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom and the European Union in five areas: the promotion of language and culture; cooperation in the fields of education, science and technology; business relations; public diplomacy; and official development cooperation. The article is based on the expert survey conducted by National Research University Higher School of Economics in December 2013. The sample includes experts of the international relations engaged in Russian foreign affairs, as well as development cooperation. The results of the expert survey allowed to identify the tools ensuring the most impact and best application of soft power in various socioeconomic and political conditions. The identified tools are structured into a system of interconnected organizational forms with five areas or clusters of influence. Key institutions acting in the five areas constitute the centres of sustainability of the respective clusters. Structural cohesion is ensured by connecting elements such as regulatory frameworks, resources, coordination mechanisms, visa regimes, and communication and public relations.
A collection of papers of the international conference “Security and Cooperation in the South China Sea” incorporates the presentations of its participants – the most prominent and authoritative world-class specialists from the United States, Japan, India, Australia, the European Union and Russia who have long been studying the problems of this region. They examine the situation in Southeast Asia and the South China Sea from variousstandpoints, analyse the history of the conflict, its juridical and political aspects, and the involvement of great powers therein. The common element that unites the texts offered to the reader is the authors’ desire to find the mostoptimal ways to resolve the dangerous standoff, to make available for the governments of the countries of the region a sort of a “roadmap” to a world of stability and cooperation.
The “International Conference on East Sea Disputes” is a two-day international conference on an issue of great regional and international importance at the main campus of Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, July 25-26, 2014
The East Sea is the world’s second busiest sea-lane through which more than half of the world’s super tankers and $5.3 trillion in annual trade pass. In recent years, conflict over maritime boundaries and attempts to unilaterally impose territorial claims have caused tension, threatened regional peace, maritime security and freedom of navigation, and affected the livelihood of thousands of fishermen in their traditional fishing area. Failure to reduce tension and manage conflict may lead to skirmishes and wars. It is important to find ways to peacefully manage conflict and resolve disputes based on international law and diplomacy. The focus of the conference is not on the conflict itself, but on how to manage conflict and resolve disputes without the use of force or threat of use of force, and protect the right of fishermen to continue fishing in their traditional fishing area.
The proceedings include selected and unedited papers of scholars and experts dealing with different aspects of the conference’s focus. This collection of papers provides an easy reference for participants to follow and participate in the discussions at the conference. It is hope that, in its rough draft, it could also be useful to those whose are interested in the East Sea disputes.
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
Korean-Russian Jeju Forum 2012 was organized by the East Asia Foundation and was dedicated to relations between Russia and the countries of the Korean Peninsula.
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.
This special publication for the 2012 New Delhi Summit is a collection of articles by government officials from BRICS countries, representatives of international organizations, businessmen and leading researchers.
The list of Russian contributors includes Sergei Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia, Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Trade Negotiations Department of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development, Vladimir Dmitriev, Vnesheconombank Chairman, Alexander Bedritsky, advisor to the Russian President, VadimLukov, Ambassador-at-large of the Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry, and representatives of the academic community.
The publication also features articles by the President of Kazakhstan NursultanNazarbayev and internationally respected economist Jim O’Neil, who coined the term “BRIC”. In his article Jim O’Neil speculates about the future of the BRICS countries and the institution as a whole.
The publication addresses important issues of the global agenda, the priorities of BRICS and the Indian Presidency, the policies and competitive advantages of the participants, as well as BRICS institutionalization, enhancing efficiency and accountability of the forum.