The debate about whether recreating a single state on the rubble of the USSR, have recently escalated, which is not surprising. Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan formed the Customs Union. For the first time in the post-Soviet space have any organization even remotely resembling the economic bloc. Simultaneously there are negotiations about the organization of the collective security Treaty into a full-fledged military bloc. The CSTO, in addition to the three above-mentioned States, includes Armenia, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.
Thus, the post-Soviet space began to dawn dawn Association. However good or bad, and what the consequences will lead?
Speaking from a General theoretical positions, the Union is always good. Modern world – a world of large economic blocs and sverigedirekt. The European Union includes the country's total population of 500 million people. In ASEAN, the figure is 450 million live In the USA 300 million people and China has 1.3 billion population is an important factor for a small nation, even having his state will never be able to play an independent role in the international arena, even if you create a modern economy. By today's standards even Germany's GDP is too small (only $3 trillion) to influence the entire world. After all, U.S. GDP is $15 trillion, China – $11 trillion. But Germany, in Alliance with all of Europe equals the USA, the EU has a GDP of $15 trillion. Influencing EU policy, Germany can influence the situation in the world.
So, for Russia, the Union favorable. We are strengthening positions in the post-Soviet space, and hence in the international arena. At the same time strengthening our borders from a military point of view. Finally, combine its economy with the economies of the allies, thereby enlarging it, making it more powerful in the world.
However, there is the problem of a unification scenario. The Association can be a trap if it will be implemented in the framework of the model of Lenin's national policy. Let me remind you that Lenin's nationalities policy meant rapid development of the outlying districts at the expense of Russia and the Russian people – a "nation of bullies" as he called us Lenin. The Federal Republic had to stand up to Russia and deter her, not to mention the fact that Russia was divided into three States – the Russian Federation, Belarus and Ukraine. The Russians, who constituted the vast number of inhabitants of the USSR, undermined and opposed to each other.
Only the RSFSR, Belarus and Turkmenistan were donors. All the rest received money from the Centre and was incredibly Canalis. Perfectly lived the Baltic States, better yet Georgia. Ukraine the level of development surpassed Russia. In this case, all the national republics were religiously believe that "Russians" are getting fat at their expense, that without Russia they could live richer, happier, and more freedom.
In the perestroika years, these sentiments have resulted in slogans like "the Russians the truth your fat" ("the Russians ate your fat"), put forward by Ukrainian nationalists and meant that lazy Russian live at the expense of hard-working Ukrainians.
As a result, Russia, with the money which for many years contained a national of the Republic, was drenched with mud. Themselves as new States, in which the USSR artificially created national cultures and elites, went to independent swimming. Of course, not all of them were adopted in the EU as the Baltic States. According to the results of the economic collapse of the starch was reduced.
But the main thing remains. Pumping resources "allies" to anything good does not.
The USSR collapsed largely because Yeltsin and his entourage did not think of the updated Union without Ukraine. Because without it, the largest Slavic, in essence, the Russian state created by the Bolsheviks, the USSR received a sharp roll in the direction of Central Asia.
Western analysts predicted that the USSR will disintegrate automatically, as soon as a significant part of its population are residents of the Central Asian republics. And this actually happened in December 1991, when Ukrainians overwhelmingly voted in a referendum for secession from the Union. Since then I have not managed to entice back, and this despite the fact that modern Ukraine is poorer than Russia – the role has changed.
Therefore, although it seems that we have only one project of unification in the post-Soviet space, actually two of them.
The first can be associated with the name of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who in his famous article "As to us to equip Russia" has suggested to create the Union of the three Slavic, Russian States – Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. By the way, Central Asia, the Nobel laureate offered to "let go" due to excessive cultural, religious and national differences.
The second project can be called "Eurasian" in the worst sense of the word. It implies the unification of Russia with Central Asia and exclusion from Europe, including from our Slavic brothers in Ukraine and Belarus (sorry for language). For this scenario performs even the American CIA, which at its information site considers Russia to Central Asia – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.
This scenario, which we are pushed by external forces, should be avoided. Yes, Russia may become a donor in Central Asia in the framework of the reincarnation of Lenin's national policy, but this will be followed by a collapse of the same scenario that was implemented in the USSR. "Finding his feet" at the expense of Russia and Russian national States to leave the Russian Federation, joining larger centres of power.
It is vital for Russia to implement the project of Russian Union of three States – Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Yes, it is clear that the West and Europe will be to prevent entering into such a Union of Ukraine, for the weakening of the unified Russian people was not only Bolsheviks, but also to our external enemies, but a single strong state, we can recreate only together. Meanwhile in Russia even with Belarus there are the constant problems in the relationship.
Russia should be smarter and not repeat the same mistakes. The reincarnation of the USSR in the present situation is impossible and directly threatens the collapse of the Russian Federation. Central Asia is not ready for full-fledged cooperation with Russia. The only exception of Kazakhstan and its prospects in connection with the forthcoming sooner or later, leaving Nazarbayev is not obvious. The remaining States of the region became part of the third world, and how would they not fall in the fourth that has occurred in Kyrgyzstan.
So we need to think about merging with Central Asia, and on friendship with Ukraine. Here is the key to any possible alliances in the post-Soviet space. Agree with Ukrainians – Russia will always be weak, including at the expense of Ukrainian-Russian confrontation. At the time, the colonialists managed to embroil Jews and Arabs, Indians and Pakistanis. Divide and conquer – old Roman principle, and it has not been canceled. Under Yushchenko the Russians with the Ukrainians scarily long and deliberately. Did not work then, but nothing prevents to make a similar attempt after another 10 years...
So either Moscow and Kiev will come up with a new scenario of integration, or uniting the post-Soviet space will meet with insurmountable difficulties, not to solve any chatter about Eurasianism.
- 14-06-2019The electronic state of the future
- 11-03-2019How to change the world, when the Earth's population will reach 10 billion
- 09-09-2018Le Monde (France): We come to the point where globalization is too expensive
- 02-05-2018Technology: 35-forecasts to 2018
- 22-03-2018"Digital state": how they have evolved
- 04-07-2012Russia cooking oil blockade and the collapse of the scenario of the 80-ies
- 23-12-2012The Vedic understanding of state policy
- 22-11-2013In the archives of the "world government"
- 08-01-2014Of a mega-Church and their communication strategies
- 08-11-2012The main threat to peace or a recipe for success