Европейский союз в Центральной Азии: границы нормативной силы
The review is focused on critical analysis of the monograph written by the French researcher O.A. Spaiser whose study was focused on EU policy in Central Asia. The reviewers pay attention to methodology which is used by the author with the purpose to analyze EU capabilities that are necessary to influence so distant region. At the heart of her work is the methodology of post-structuralism and post-modernism. This uncommon scientific approach helps to estimate effectiveness of EU policies in Central Asia and gives an opportunity to make judgments on the political agency of the Union as such. Reviewers positively assess Spaiser’s contribution to the European studies as her book is one of a few studies where doubts about universality of EU normative model where accurately made. In contrast to the European part of the post-Soviet space, where Brussels’ policy of Europeanization has some effect and brought benefits to EU as a player, in Central Asia EU normative influence on political life is quite limited.
In Central Asia, the water deficit and water-energy problem have been one of the most acute and conflict-ridden challenges for the sustainable development of the region and for regional security. Key trade and investment partners, including Russia and the European Union, could play a considerable role in influencing this issue, due to the long-lasting status quo, the inability to find a solution through intra-regional dialogue and the region’s rising dependence on foreign trade. Indeed, water-related interactions between Russia and the EU have been developing in a complementary manner. The EU possesses new technologies and its members have access to long-term capital markets, while Russia carries influence through providing security, regulating migration and holding a favourable political position for offering mediation services to the republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. This article examines EU – Russia relations regarding water issues in Central Asia over the medium term. By analyzing cooperative and non-cooperative strategies used by the major stakeholders in the water conflict (the five republics and the third parties of Russia and the EU), it confirms the continuous complementary character of EU and Russian activities in this context. Russia will take responsibility for moderating the principal questions (as with the construction of big dams such as Rogun or Kambarata), as they relate to the provision of security guarantees. The EU will act through providing support for water companies from small and medium-sized enterprises, and promoting the European Water Initiative principles and by developing its investment policy. The intersection of interests is possible when Russia will attract an independent arbiter, such as an actor available to provide guarantees related to the values of professional objectivism, human rights support and environment protection. These issues inevitably arise with relation to big infrastructure projects.
The article examines how Russian criticism of the normative power Europe (NPE) has evolved. Initially Russia insisted that NPE arguments covered realpolitik. However, two new approaches have recently emerged in Russian reporting on human rights in the EU. One is the demonstration that the EU does not qualify as a normative power. Another is the development of an alternative interpretation of human rights. Russia has, therefore, mastered all NPE critiques. This has occurred as the result of a change in how Russia views international relations. Moscow’s ultimate goal has, however, remained unchanged; it is to reaffirm its equality with key global players.
The article examines partnerships for modernisation between Russia, on the one hand, and the EU as well as 23 out of its 28 member states, on the other hand. In doing that it first identifies the difference between the Russian economic interpretation of modernisation and the EU's one based on political values. The article then demonstrates the ambiguity rather than singularity of the position that EU member states promote in their modernisation partnerships with Russia. To illustrate the difference among EU member states’ the article designs a scale of Russia’s sensitivity to various political aspects of modernization and then posits member states on this scale on the basis of their national partnerships for modernisation with Russia. As a result, a new classification of EU member states emerges; it is based on the extent, to which they are ready to defend the political definition of modernisation (and ultimately the EU's normative power) in their relations with Russia.
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.