Eurasian Economic Union: Integration Organization or Tool for Russian Regional Hegemony? The Case of Participation of the Kyrgyz Republic in the EAEU since 2015
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34767/SIIP.2020.19.06Keywords:
EAEU, Russia, geopolitics, international organizations, integration, Kyrgyz Republic, labor migrants, economic indicatorsAbstract
This paper uses the case of Kyrgyz Republic to analyze two competing views concerning the role of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). The realist view claims that the EAEU is a tool of Russian hegemonic power over its region of influence and interprets is as a primarily political rather than economic organization designed to serve Russia’s national interests at the expense of those of other members. The liberal institutionalist view, on the other hand, sees the EAEU as a new regional organization of economic integration that is beneficial for all members. Analyzing the case of the participation of the Kyrgyz Republic in this union makes it clear that it is still too early to determine which perspective is correct as there is evidence in support of both.
References
Akeneev, J. (2017, 31 January). “Pros and cons of Kyrgyzstan participation in EAEU”, paper presented in expert meeting “Integration in
Gast, A-S. (2018). “Kyrgyzstan and EAEU: A partnership with Obstacles”. Policy Brief, 45, Academy of OSCE in Bishkek.
Haas, E. (1958). The Uniting of Europe. Available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/100books/file/EN-H-BW-0038-The-uniting-of-Europe.pdf
Keohane, R. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in world political economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kropatcheva, E. (2012). Russian foreign policy in the realm of European security through the lens of neoclassical realism. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 3, 30–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2011.10.004
Kirkham, K. (2016). The formation of EAEU: How successful is the Russian regional hegemony? Journal of Eurasian Studies, 7(2), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2015.06.002.
Kudryavtseva T. (2019, 1 April). Ситуация на границе. Бизнес терпит убытки, чиновники по-прежнему бездействуют. Available at: https://24.kg/ekonomika/113483/
Mearsheimer, J. (1994–1995). False promise of International Institutions, International Security, 19(3), 5–49.
Moravcsik, A. (1998). The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. Cornell University Press.
Pedersen, T. (2002). Cooperative hegemony. Power, ideas and institutions in regional integration, Review of International Studies, 28(4), 677–696.
Sabyrbekov, R. (2019). Interview on March 26, 2019 at AUCA. Bishkek.
Sariev, T. (2017, April). Lecture at American University of Central Asia in April 2017 on joining KR in EAEU.
Schrader, H. (2019). Interview in Bishkek, March 2019.
Toktogazieva, S. (2019). Interview, on April 3, 2019 at AUCA, Bishkek.
Van Herpen (2014). Putin’s wars: The rise of Russia’s new imperialism, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield publisher.
Vinokurov, E. (2017). EAEU: Current state and preliminary results, Russian Journal of Economics 3, 54–70.
Ziadullaev, S., Ziadullaev, N., (2017). EAEU: the test of time (ЕАЭС: Испытание временем), Vestnik RFFI Gumanitarnye I obshestvennye nauki, 3, 71.
Ziadullaev N., (2014). EAEU between polictics and economics, Problemy teorii and praktiki upravleiya, 8. Ministry of Economics of Kyrgyz Republic, indirect interview with representatives, on April 4, 2019 in Bishkek.
National Bank of Kyrgyz Republic. (2019). Available at: https://tradingeconomics.com/kyrgyzstan/foreign-direct-investment
Official web site of Ministry of Economic Development of Kyrgyz Republic. Available at: http://mineconom.gov.kg/ru/direct/6
NSC – National Statistic Committee of Kyrgyzstan. Available at: http://stat.kg/en/
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Świat Idei i Polityki
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
