Eurasian economic union: lessons of history for the EU

Eurasian economic union during quite short life proved bigger reality than numerous previous unions in the post-Soviet area.Thus it requires studying both from the part of its member-countries and EU.

Centre for European Policy Studies at the beginning of December has conducted a meeting dedicated to the development of the Eurasian economic union with participation of politicians and experts. The reports of the participants of the board mainly covered economic and institutional aspects of development. But behind these trappings one should see political and value grounds of Eurasian integration. They were not touched upon during the discussion; still, they require comprehension.

Eurasian economic union for its quite short life has already managed to prove its bigger reality if compared to the numerous previous unions in the post-Soviet area. In this connection it requires studying and relations both from the part of actors within the union member-countries and from the part of the international agents such as EU.

Eurasian economic union is declared as constructed on pragmatism and rationalism: its aim is the growth of trade turnovers within the union and general economic growth. The evaluation of efficiency and viability of the ongoing processes will be done in accordance with the European indices. And Eurasian economic union can be treated business-like; EU can consider it as a trade partner only.

But the success of the economic integration has direct connection with the political component. We shouldn’t forget that none of the three member-countries do not comply with the idea of democracy EU has. European Union applies great effort to strengthen transformation of the countries in this region, bringing them closer to the standards of its organization and political systems’ functioning aiming at the increase of stability and efficiency of collaboration with them. Success of the Eurasian economic integration will serve as an evidence of the efficiency of the models existing in Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, which will affect the international political scene, giving this union certain political weight, especially in relations with the UE.

Belarusan and European relations can serve as a case-model for building future interrelations between the EU and the Eurasian economic union. European Union should use the experience of its collaboration with undemocratic government in modeling its relations with the union of such countries.

First, EU should understand that the lack of democracy in member-countries of the Eurasian economic union is not some mistake or misunderstanding but is done on purpose. Consistent consolidation of the authoritarian regime in Belarus has proved that. Through the strengthening of the Eurasian economic union the strengthening of the authoritarian regime takes place in this area. The processes very similar to those that took place in Belarus earlier are already happening in Russia; European integration processes slowed down in Ukraine. All this can become a sign of the beginning of the large-scale democratic rollback in the eastern countries-neighbors to the EU.

The second important moment is connected with the fact that the existing politics of EU turns out to be ineffective in relation to the governments uninterested in European integration and political reforms. The EU politics on its own cannot cause any political reforms, neither in Belarus nor in other neighboring countries. Despite the crisis of democracy and extreme limitedness of political relations between EU and Belarus, their economic relations are dynamically developing, though the EU doesn’t have an opportunity to use this factor to apply pressure on Belarusan authorities. Relations between EU and Russia are of similar character. Thus, in relations between EU and Eurasian economic union the same mechanism can work out: EU will be trapped in trade relations without possibility to influence the democratization of the regimes.

And finally, when developing politics in relation to the Eurasian economic union EU should take into consideration the divergence of interests of its member-countries. In case of Belarus, a number of EU countries (Lithuania, Latvia, Slovenia and others) have considerable economic interests in the country, for the sake of which they can block political decisions of the EU motivated by value guidelines. Big business of Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, and Austria is already establishing good relations with the Eurasian economic union, and the wider these processes will develop, the more difficult it will be for the EU to take concerted action and to have a common stand in case of need.

The principal lesson of the European politics in Belarus which EU can transfer to building relations with the Eurasian economic union is that one cannot simply wait for and do nothing. With the development and more profound Eurasian integration the processes that contradict the interests of the EU take place: undemocratic regimes are becoming stronger, democratization of the area is becoming complicated. Due to the increasing democratic rollback EU faces an acute need to reform its foreign policy in the area, to make it more efficient for the work with the governments that are not oriented on democracy.

Remembering that the European Union has also appeared from the economic union, moreover, a trade one (European Coal and Steel Community), one should be infinitely attentive to the development of the Eurasian economic union. As the risk that it can stouten authoritarianism in the post-Soviet area is far too large.