Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1177/18793665211046066
Anar Valiyev, Abbas Babayev
This article analyzes the role of the state youth policy of Azerbaijan in supporting young people through their transition from school to work, which is one of the stages when young people can be in particularly fragile situation if not provided with necessary opportunities. The reason for studying the case of Azerbaijan is a considerable share of youth Not in Employment, Education, or Training (NEET youth) among the country’s youth community. The NEET indicator is considered as a comprehensive indicator within the post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda to measure youth exclusion and marginalization. The findings of this research demonstrate that while the government assumes a broad responsibility to provide youth with education and employment opportunities to support their transition, these intentions have not been translated into real actions. An alarming situation of the country’s youth population is at risk of further exacerbation due to poor understanding of local realities by such global advocates for youth development as United Nations. We discuss this considering the flaws in the operationalization and localization of the concept of the “youth participation” promoted by the United Nations to advance youth interests.
{"title":"Azerbaijani youth in transition: Is the state youth policy effective enough?","authors":"Anar Valiyev, Abbas Babayev","doi":"10.1177/18793665211046066","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665211046066","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyzes the role of the state youth policy of Azerbaijan in supporting young people through their transition from school to work, which is one of the stages when young people can be in particularly fragile situation if not provided with necessary opportunities. The reason for studying the case of Azerbaijan is a considerable share of youth Not in Employment, Education, or Training (NEET youth) among the country’s youth community. The NEET indicator is considered as a comprehensive indicator within the post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda to measure youth exclusion and marginalization. The findings of this research demonstrate that while the government assumes a broad responsibility to provide youth with education and employment opportunities to support their transition, these intentions have not been translated into real actions. An alarming situation of the country’s youth population is at risk of further exacerbation due to poor understanding of local realities by such global advocates for youth development as United Nations. We discuss this considering the flaws in the operationalization and localization of the concept of the “youth participation” promoted by the United Nations to advance youth interests.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"145 - 154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73118680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1177/18793665211041198
Slyamzhar Akhmetzharov, Serik Orazgaliyev
In this study, we used the institutional corruption framework to analyze the evolution of labor unions in Kazakhstan. As a research method, we conducted a case study by combining document analysis with survey data covering (n)1,200 respondents across all 14 regions of the country. Our findings suggest that external and internal influences weakened labor unions and diverted from fulfilling their primary purpose of promoting interests of their members. External influences, represented by restrictive regulatory framework and state intervention, create conditions of limited independence of labor unions leaving them extremely narrow scope to operate in. Internal influences are represented by disagreements and conflicts between national-level labor unions. This article stipulates that dysfunctional and institutionally corrupt labor unions in Kazakhstan serve as an indicator of state fragility. The findings confirmed that institutional corruption of labor unions has an adverse impact on public trust, while a frequent occurrence of labor conflicts might impact political risk factors, contributing to increased state fragility.
{"title":"Labor unions and institutional corruption: The case of Kazakhstan","authors":"Slyamzhar Akhmetzharov, Serik Orazgaliyev","doi":"10.1177/18793665211041198","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665211041198","url":null,"abstract":"In this study, we used the institutional corruption framework to analyze the evolution of labor unions in Kazakhstan. As a research method, we conducted a case study by combining document analysis with survey data covering (n)1,200 respondents across all 14 regions of the country. Our findings suggest that external and internal influences weakened labor unions and diverted from fulfilling their primary purpose of promoting interests of their members. External influences, represented by restrictive regulatory framework and state intervention, create conditions of limited independence of labor unions leaving them extremely narrow scope to operate in. Internal influences are represented by disagreements and conflicts between national-level labor unions. This article stipulates that dysfunctional and institutionally corrupt labor unions in Kazakhstan serve as an indicator of state fragility. The findings confirmed that institutional corruption of labor unions has an adverse impact on public trust, while a frequent occurrence of labor conflicts might impact political risk factors, contributing to increased state fragility.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"17 1","pages":"133 - 144"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85651449","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1177/18793665211029294
E. Satybaldieva
This article offers a first person account of women’s mobilization against banking and microfinance sectors in Kyrgyzstan. It focuses on the key factors for the evolution of the anti-debt movement, and women’s political strategies to problematize interest and to denaturalize the discourse of financial inclusion. For many years, the financial industry has operated a gendered process of neoliberal capital accumulation under the guise of empowerment that has produced tensions between transnational capital and marginalized women. Building upon Bourdieusian ideas on social movements, the study shows the significance of strain and situational definition in the formation of the anti-debt mobilization. The article uses in-depth interviews with the leaders and activists of the anti-debt movement and borrowers to explore how gender, class and capital were intertwined. It contributes to the literature on post-Soviet politics by challenging the dominant elite-centered frameworks, which are inadequate to explain local movements and gendered activism.
{"title":"Bad debt: The women’s mobilization against the financial industry in Kyrgyzstan","authors":"E. Satybaldieva","doi":"10.1177/18793665211029294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665211029294","url":null,"abstract":"This article offers a first person account of women’s mobilization against banking and microfinance sectors in Kyrgyzstan. It focuses on the key factors for the evolution of the anti-debt movement, and women’s political strategies to problematize interest and to denaturalize the discourse of financial inclusion. For many years, the financial industry has operated a gendered process of neoliberal capital accumulation under the guise of empowerment that has produced tensions between transnational capital and marginalized women. Building upon Bourdieusian ideas on social movements, the study shows the significance of strain and situational definition in the formation of the anti-debt mobilization. The article uses in-depth interviews with the leaders and activists of the anti-debt movement and borrowers to explore how gender, class and capital were intertwined. It contributes to the literature on post-Soviet politics by challenging the dominant elite-centered frameworks, which are inadequate to explain local movements and gendered activism.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"169 - 181"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73753774","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1177/18793665211034185
E. Shchekotin, V. Goiko, M. Myagkov, Darya O Dunaeva
The article offers a new method of quality of life assessment based on online activities of social networks users. The method has obvious advantages (quickness of research, low costs, large scale, and detailed character of the obtained information) and limitations (it covers only the “digital population,” whereas the rural population is not included). The article dwells on the potential of social networks as a data source to analyze the quality of life; it also presents the results of an empirical study of online activities of the users of VK, the most popular Russian social network. Using the obtained data, the authors have calculated the quality of life index for 83 regions of the Russian Federation based on 19 parameters of economic, social, and political aspects of life quality.
{"title":"Assessment of quality of life in regions of Russia based on social media data","authors":"E. Shchekotin, V. Goiko, M. Myagkov, Darya O Dunaeva","doi":"10.1177/18793665211034185","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665211034185","url":null,"abstract":"The article offers a new method of quality of life assessment based on online activities of social networks users. The method has obvious advantages (quickness of research, low costs, large scale, and detailed character of the obtained information) and limitations (it covers only the “digital population,” whereas the rural population is not included). The article dwells on the potential of social networks as a data source to analyze the quality of life; it also presents the results of an empirical study of online activities of the users of VK, the most popular Russian social network. Using the obtained data, the authors have calculated the quality of life index for 83 regions of the Russian Federation based on 19 parameters of economic, social, and political aspects of life quality.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"37 1","pages":"182 - 198"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88878680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1177/18793665211044839
P. Kalra, Siddharth Shanker Saxena
The article aims to introduce the underlying motivation and conceptual underpinning to the special issue entitled “Globalizing Local Understanding of Fragility in Eurasia.” The main purpose of this article is to problematize the popular opinion and portrayal of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) and more generally the countries of Eurasia and the Caucasus as inherently fragile states which are politically unstable and thus on the brink of collapse. This article also seeks to question narratives of modernity that are singular and constantly out of reach for large swathes of the world’s populations because of the narrowness and hegemonic nature of the architecture of global governance. By carefully considering the ways and means through which international institutions categorize countries as fragile and/or failed, the article aims to provide the theoretical foreground for the special issue which focuses on locating inherent community resilience strategies. We explain how the non-participatory norm making behavior of international organizations privilege certain actors, largely the Global North, and simultaneously ignore the majority of Eurasian states. In other words, a demand predicated in the linear evaluation of institutions and norms dictated by global institutions clash with the Eurasian model of inherent complex adaptive capability and introduce fragility. The focus thus is on understanding the ‘local’ based on the historical analysis of development in the region, nodal points of urban development and community life, forms of social capital, and community resilience strategies in the wider Eurasian region.
{"title":"Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia","authors":"P. Kalra, Siddharth Shanker Saxena","doi":"10.1177/18793665211044839","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665211044839","url":null,"abstract":"The article aims to introduce the underlying motivation and conceptual underpinning to the special issue entitled “Globalizing Local Understanding of Fragility in Eurasia.” The main purpose of this article is to problematize the popular opinion and portrayal of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) and more generally the countries of Eurasia and the Caucasus as inherently fragile states which are politically unstable and thus on the brink of collapse. This article also seeks to question narratives of modernity that are singular and constantly out of reach for large swathes of the world’s populations because of the narrowness and hegemonic nature of the architecture of global governance. By carefully considering the ways and means through which international institutions categorize countries as fragile and/or failed, the article aims to provide the theoretical foreground for the special issue which focuses on locating inherent community resilience strategies. We explain how the non-participatory norm making behavior of international organizations privilege certain actors, largely the Global North, and simultaneously ignore the majority of Eurasian states. In other words, a demand predicated in the linear evaluation of institutions and norms dictated by global institutions clash with the Eurasian model of inherent complex adaptive capability and introduce fragility. The focus thus is on understanding the ‘local’ based on the historical analysis of development in the region, nodal points of urban development and community life, forms of social capital, and community resilience strategies in the wider Eurasian region.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"12 1","pages":"103 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88159942","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/1879366521999899
I. Denisov, O. Paramonov, E. Arapova, I. Safranchuk
The newly minted concept of the “Indo-Pacific Region” (IPR) is generally seen as a response by the United States and its allies to China’s growing influence in strategically important areas of the Pacific and Indian oceans. However, the view of IPR as a single (U.S.-led) anti-Beijing front is simplistic and misleading, obscuring a variety of approaches by the region’s states. New Delhi has a strong tradition of non-alignment, whereas Tokyo is more interested in rules that restrict unilateral actions not only by China but also by other regional players, including the United States. Australian business is very cautious about frictions in trade relations with China. Beijing views the growing military activity of the United States off its shores, including in the South China Sea, as a threat to regional stability. According to the authoritative Chinese sources, the Indo-Pacific strategy of Donald Trump is part of broader efforts to prevent China from becoming a dominant regional and global power. At the same time, the development of Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ (ASEAN) understanding of the Indo-Pacific region is less of a concern to Beijing, as the South-East Asian countries interested in balancing China and the United States are unlikely to fully join the fight against the “authoritarian threat.” As for Russia, it unequivocally rejects the military/power-based U.S. version of the IPR concept and is more amenable to flexible versions promoted by other players, such as Tokyo’s multilateral vision for the Indo-Pacific Region. In the end, the final response of Russia and China to IPR will thus be determined not only by U.S. actions but also by the behavior of other regional powers.
{"title":"Russia, China, and the concept of Indo-Pacific","authors":"I. Denisov, O. Paramonov, E. Arapova, I. Safranchuk","doi":"10.1177/1879366521999899","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1879366521999899","url":null,"abstract":"The newly minted concept of the “Indo-Pacific Region” (IPR) is generally seen as a response by the United States and its allies to China’s growing influence in strategically important areas of the Pacific and Indian oceans. However, the view of IPR as a single (U.S.-led) anti-Beijing front is simplistic and misleading, obscuring a variety of approaches by the region’s states. New Delhi has a strong tradition of non-alignment, whereas Tokyo is more interested in rules that restrict unilateral actions not only by China but also by other regional players, including the United States. Australian business is very cautious about frictions in trade relations with China. Beijing views the growing military activity of the United States off its shores, including in the South China Sea, as a threat to regional stability. According to the authoritative Chinese sources, the Indo-Pacific strategy of Donald Trump is part of broader efforts to prevent China from becoming a dominant regional and global power. At the same time, the development of Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ (ASEAN) understanding of the Indo-Pacific region is less of a concern to Beijing, as the South-East Asian countries interested in balancing China and the United States are unlikely to fully join the fight against the “authoritarian threat.” As for Russia, it unequivocally rejects the military/power-based U.S. version of the IPR concept and is more amenable to flexible versions promoted by other players, such as Tokyo’s multilateral vision for the Indo-Pacific Region. In the end, the final response of Russia and China to IPR will thus be determined not only by U.S. actions but also by the behavior of other regional powers.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"13 1","pages":"72 - 85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78735717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/1879366521998240
G. Diesen
Will increased economic connectivity on the Eurasian supercontinent convert Europe into the western peninsula of Greater Eurasia? US geoeconomic primacy has relied on organizing the two other major economic regions of the world, Europe and Asia, into the US-led trans-Atlantic region and Indo-Pacific region. Greater Eurasia is a geoeconomic initiative by Russia and China to integrate Europe and Asia to construct a new region. Greater Eurasia is constructed by first establishing a Russian-Chinese regional partnership that decouples from US primacy, and second to integrate Europe into the new Eurasian region. The geoeconomic architecture for region-building, much like the economics of nation-building, consists of developing connectivity and dependencies with strategic industries, transportation corridors, and financial instruments.
{"title":"Europe as the Western Peninsula of Greater Eurasia","authors":"G. Diesen","doi":"10.1177/1879366521998240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1879366521998240","url":null,"abstract":"Will increased economic connectivity on the Eurasian supercontinent convert Europe into the western peninsula of Greater Eurasia? US geoeconomic primacy has relied on organizing the two other major economic regions of the world, Europe and Asia, into the US-led trans-Atlantic region and Indo-Pacific region. Greater Eurasia is a geoeconomic initiative by Russia and China to integrate Europe and Asia to construct a new region. Greater Eurasia is constructed by first establishing a Russian-Chinese regional partnership that decouples from US primacy, and second to integrate Europe into the new Eurasian region. The geoeconomic architecture for region-building, much like the economics of nation-building, consists of developing connectivity and dependencies with strategic industries, transportation corridors, and financial instruments.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"43 1","pages":"19 - 27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89044097","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/1879366521999907
Andrej Krickovic, R. Sakwa
Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). This Special Issue is a project of the `International Laboratory on International Order Studies and the New Regionalism’ of the Higher School of Economics. It examines four key issues. First, at the most abstract level, the collection looks at the profound shift in economic and political power from the West to the East. The definition of both terms—East and West—will be contextualized, but it is clear that we need profound study of political spatiality to provide deeper framing of the epochal move of the center of economic gravity to the East, and with it shifts in global power and the very terms in which power, influence, and status are assessed. The “West” as a political concept was devised during the Cold War, but it is now being disaggregated; while the “East” is taking on new political forms and becoming more assertive in expression. The new East is not necessarily commensurate with the West in political and order-making terms, and thus a new East-West rivalry has emerged, accompanied by continuing North-South contradictions. The ability of the ideology of globalization to smooth over these antinomies is weakening. Second, and rather more specifically, the early postCold War years were accompanied by the belief that Europe would at last be united and that some sort of pan-continental Greater European political identity would emerge. This was formulated by Mikhail Gorbachev as a Common European Home, but his conception of a transformed European international politics was immediately challenged by the idea of a “Europe whole and free” based on the Atlantic power system. In the end, the latter concept led to a process of the enlargement of an existing system, through the expansion of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union, rather than the transformation of European international relations. No stable inclusive peace order was established in Europe, and after 25 years of the cold peace, in 2014 some sort of new Cold War returned to the continent and to global politics. Third, over the same period Asia underwent a process of dramatic transformation, and today the challenge is to find an adequate political form for the rise of the East. China has sponsored the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), while the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and other regional bodies have become more active. Global contestation is now the sharpest in this region, accompanied by a clash of integration and alignment projects. The idea of the Indo-Pacific Region (IPR) is explicitly sponsored by the U
知识共享非商业性CC BY-NC:本文在知识共享署名-非商业4.0许可(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)的条款下发布，该许可允许非商业用途，复制和分发作品，无需进一步许可，前提是原始作品的署名与SAGE和开放获取页面(https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage)上指定的一致。本期特刊是高等经济学院“国际秩序研究与新区域主义国际实验室”的课题之一。它探讨了四个关键问题。首先，在最抽象的层面上，该文集着眼于经济和政治力量从西方到东方的深刻转移。“东方”和“西方”这两个术语的定义将被置于语境中，但很明显，我们需要对政治空间性进行深入的研究，以提供更深入的框架，了解经济重心向东方的划时代移动，以及随之而来的全球权力的转移，以及评估权力、影响力和地位的术语。“西方”作为一个政治概念是在冷战期间设计出来的，但现在它正在解体;而“东方”正在采取新的政治形式，在表达上变得更加自信。在政治和建立秩序方面，新的东方不一定与西方相称，因此出现了一种新的东西方竞争，伴随着持续的南北矛盾。全球化意识形态消除这些矛盾的能力正在减弱。其次，更具体地说，在冷战后的早期，人们相信欧洲最终会团结起来，某种泛大陆的大欧洲政治认同将会出现。米哈伊尔•戈尔巴乔夫(Mikhail Gorbachev)将其表述为“欧洲共同家园”(Common European Home)，但他关于欧洲国际政治转型的构想立即受到了基于大西洋权力体系的“完整而自由的欧洲”理念的挑战。最后，后者的概念导致了一个扩大现有体系的过程，通过北大西洋公约组织(北约)和欧洲联盟的扩大，而不是欧洲国际关系的转变。欧洲没有建立起稳定的包容性和平秩序，在经历了25年的冷和平之后，2014年某种形式的新冷战重返欧洲大陆和全球政治。第三，在同一时期，亚洲经历了一个戏剧性的转变过程，今天的挑战是为东方的崛起找到一个适当的政治形式。中国发起了“一带一路”倡议，而东南亚国家联盟(东盟)和其他地区组织也变得更加活跃。目前，该地区的全球竞争最为激烈，同时还伴随着一体化和结盟项目的冲突。印太地区(IPR)的构想是由美国明确提出的，作为一种重新定位地区关系的方式，使其更有利于美国的安全和地缘经济关切。第四，也是至关重要的一点，俄罗斯试图找到一种适当的政治形式，以确保欧亚大陆的心脏地带能够在仍然强大的西方和崛起的东方之间保持自己的政治主体性。因此，中国从2016年开始提出“大欧亚伙伴关系”倡议。尽管这一构想仍然含糊不清，其领土范围也具有弹性，但这一想法仍然代表了一种重要的理论和政治干预。对一些人来说，这只不过是对莫斯科在西方失败的补偿，它接受了早些时候宣布的“重返亚洲”(Pivot to Asia)的理念，而对另一些人来说，它代表了一种基本的、拖延已久的新政治地理主张，这种主张将为多极世界的理念提供实质内容。这与主要的区域组织，尤其是上海合作组织(SCO)和复兴的RIC(俄罗斯、印度和中国)三角，以及更广泛的金砖国家集团(巴西和南非的加入)和其他主要的区域参与者，如日本和韩国，如何适应仍然是一个相当有争议的问题。因此，本期特刊将侧重于对后冷战时代全球变化的理论和实证研究，包括冷战思维仍在影响我们的理解方式。与此同时，新的区域概念和挑战正在出现，首先是“大欧亚”的概念。中国思想家对“一带一路”这个词持矛盾态度，但对莫斯科来说，它提供了一个项目，可以表达其成为东方主要参与者的雄心，与其大国地位的雄心相称。 区域大国欢迎这一倡议，因为它可以为主权和发展的传统思想提供更大的空间，但如果它没有考虑到区域参与者的不同利益，这也是一个令人关切的问题。一些作者是大欧亚计划的积极支持者。借鉴英国学派理论，导论:从大欧洲到大欧亚[99907]欧洲科学院欧亚研究杂志
{"title":"Introduction: From greater Europe to greater Eurasia","authors":"Andrej Krickovic, R. Sakwa","doi":"10.1177/1879366521999907","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1879366521999907","url":null,"abstract":"Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). This Special Issue is a project of the `International Laboratory on International Order Studies and the New Regionalism’ of the Higher School of Economics. It examines four key issues. First, at the most abstract level, the collection looks at the profound shift in economic and political power from the West to the East. The definition of both terms—East and West—will be contextualized, but it is clear that we need profound study of political spatiality to provide deeper framing of the epochal move of the center of economic gravity to the East, and with it shifts in global power and the very terms in which power, influence, and status are assessed. The “West” as a political concept was devised during the Cold War, but it is now being disaggregated; while the “East” is taking on new political forms and becoming more assertive in expression. The new East is not necessarily commensurate with the West in political and order-making terms, and thus a new East-West rivalry has emerged, accompanied by continuing North-South contradictions. The ability of the ideology of globalization to smooth over these antinomies is weakening. Second, and rather more specifically, the early postCold War years were accompanied by the belief that Europe would at last be united and that some sort of pan-continental Greater European political identity would emerge. This was formulated by Mikhail Gorbachev as a Common European Home, but his conception of a transformed European international politics was immediately challenged by the idea of a “Europe whole and free” based on the Atlantic power system. In the end, the latter concept led to a process of the enlargement of an existing system, through the expansion of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union, rather than the transformation of European international relations. No stable inclusive peace order was established in Europe, and after 25 years of the cold peace, in 2014 some sort of new Cold War returned to the continent and to global politics. Third, over the same period Asia underwent a process of dramatic transformation, and today the challenge is to find an adequate political form for the rise of the East. China has sponsored the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), while the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and other regional bodies have become more active. Global contestation is now the sharpest in this region, accompanied by a clash of integration and alignment projects. The idea of the Indo-Pacific Region (IPR) is explicitly sponsored by the U","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"41 1","pages":"3 - 4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78123530","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/1879366521998808
Andrej Krickovic, I. Pellicciari
Russia’s approach to alignment and regional integration has evolved dramatically—from a focus on the West and disinterest and neglect of regional integration in the 1990s, to vigorous efforts to reintegrate the post-Soviet space under Russian leadership in the period between 2009 and 2014, to forming a “Greater Eurasia” that transcends the post-Soviet space and includes China and other non-Western powers (such as Turkey, India, and Iran) today. Status concerns are key to understanding this evolution in policy and vision as a declining Russia struggles to avoid losing great power status. Russia initially eschewed its relationships with post-Soviet states in favor of integration with Europe and the West, which seemed to offer greater status gains. When Russia failed to find a place in the Western liberal order and “Greater Europe” commensurate with its status aspirations, it shifted its attention to regional integration of the post-Soviet space, believing this would make Russia, in the words of President Putin, “one of the poles in a future multipolar world.” However, integrating the post-Soviet space proved to be an arduous task (that failed miserably in Ukraine) and did not yield the status gains Russia hoped for. The scope of Eurasian integration has now shifted to the formation of a “Greater Eurasia,” as Russia looks to gain status through its association with more dynamic rising and emerging powers.
{"title":"From “Greater Europe” to “Greater Eurasia”: Status concerns and the evolution of Russia’s approach to alignment and regional integration","authors":"Andrej Krickovic, I. Pellicciari","doi":"10.1177/1879366521998808","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1879366521998808","url":null,"abstract":"Russia’s approach to alignment and regional integration has evolved dramatically—from a focus on the West and disinterest and neglect of regional integration in the 1990s, to vigorous efforts to reintegrate the post-Soviet space under Russian leadership in the period between 2009 and 2014, to forming a “Greater Eurasia” that transcends the post-Soviet space and includes China and other non-Western powers (such as Turkey, India, and Iran) today. Status concerns are key to understanding this evolution in policy and vision as a declining Russia struggles to avoid losing great power status. Russia initially eschewed its relationships with post-Soviet states in favor of integration with Europe and the West, which seemed to offer greater status gains. When Russia failed to find a place in the Western liberal order and “Greater Europe” commensurate with its status aspirations, it shifted its attention to regional integration of the post-Soviet space, believing this would make Russia, in the words of President Putin, “one of the poles in a future multipolar world.” However, integrating the post-Soviet space proved to be an arduous task (that failed miserably in Ukraine) and did not yield the status gains Russia hoped for. The scope of Eurasian integration has now shifted to the formation of a “Greater Eurasia,” as Russia looks to gain status through its association with more dynamic rising and emerging powers.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"37 1","pages":"86 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1879366521998808","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72503040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/18793665211000057
A. Lukin, D. Novikov
Can international anarchy be stabilized, if not globally, then at least regionally? Those scholars who give a positive answer usually refer to the North Atlantic community which can be categorized as an international society from the viewpoint of the English school. The emergence of such a community outside the West is traditionally considered hardly possible. However, this article argues that it may already be emerging in Eurasia, with Russia and China being the key drivers of this trend. In the past few years, these two powers have put forward a number of major initiatives aimed at developing transport networks and logistics, and deepening economic and institutional ties between different parts of the continent. These include but are not limited to Eurasian Economic Union, supported by Russia, and China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Together, Moscow and Beijing began to form a new platform for security and economic cooperation “from Kaliningrad to Shanghai”—the community of Greater Eurasia. Based on the analysis of the geopolitical logic of these initiatives, this article suggests that a new, non-Western international society may be forming in Eurasia among the states with different political systems and cultures, but common geopolitical aims and fears.
{"title":"Sino-Russian rapprochement and Greater Eurasia: From geopolitical pole to international society?","authors":"A. Lukin, D. Novikov","doi":"10.1177/18793665211000057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665211000057","url":null,"abstract":"Can international anarchy be stabilized, if not globally, then at least regionally? Those scholars who give a positive answer usually refer to the North Atlantic community which can be categorized as an international society from the viewpoint of the English school. The emergence of such a community outside the West is traditionally considered hardly possible. However, this article argues that it may already be emerging in Eurasia, with Russia and China being the key drivers of this trend. In the past few years, these two powers have put forward a number of major initiatives aimed at developing transport networks and logistics, and deepening economic and institutional ties between different parts of the continent. These include but are not limited to Eurasian Economic Union, supported by Russia, and China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Together, Moscow and Beijing began to form a new platform for security and economic cooperation “from Kaliningrad to Shanghai”—the community of Greater Eurasia. Based on the analysis of the geopolitical logic of these initiatives, this article suggests that a new, non-Western international society may be forming in Eurasia among the states with different political systems and cultures, but common geopolitical aims and fears.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"252 1","pages":"28 - 45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78197729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：