Positive Effects of Harmonizing of the Chinese Silk Road Initiative and the Eurasian Integration

The article offers an analysis of geopolitical and geoeconomic transformations, caused by the process of conjugation of Chinese Silk Road Economic Belt (SREB) Initiative and the process of integration within the Eurasian Economic Union. When assessing the negation of non-preferential trade and economic agreement between the People's Republic of China and the EEU, the authors conclude that it will significantly strengthen the international subjectivity of the Eurasian Economic Union. At the same time success of the Eurasian regional integration project and its conjugation with SREB initiative to a great extent depends on whether the particular interests of the certain states will prevail in this case or their interests will be coordinated to the objectives of multilateral cooperation of the EEU countries. Such sensitive questions as customs regulation, protection of domestic market and producers, regulation of conditions of access for external players to the transport and energy markets of the EEU countries can be solved in the most effective way with appropriate consolidated approach of participants of the Eurasian integration. New opportunities, which are presented by conjugation of the SREB and the EEU, should be considered as a peculiar examination on efficiency and a political maturity for Post-Soviet elites. New modality of the Eurasian regionalism can become a practical result of conjugation of the SREB and the EEU. The accompanying process of development of the Greater Eurasia concept reflects objective dynamics of the strengthening economic interdependence, but at the same time promotes designing of the macroregion on the basis of the ideas and identities which harmonization will serve the interests of China, Russia, other countries of the EEU and wider range of the Eurasian actors.

1. (2017). Aktualnye problemy sovremennykh rossijsko-kitajskyh otnoshenyj. Kruglyi stol v IDV RAN [Actual Problems of Contemporary Russia-China Relations. A Round Table. Institute for Far East Studies]. Problemy Dalnego Vostoka. No. 5. P. 4–25.

2. (2017). Evraziiskij ekonomicheskij soyuz [Eurasian Economic Union]. St. Petersburg: CIS EABD. 296 p.

3. Andronova I.V., Ganeeva M.V. (2018). Evrazijskij ekonomicheskij coyuz: Vneshnie ugrozy ekonomicheskoj bezopasnosti [Eurasian Economic Union: External Treats to Economic Security]. Bolshaya Evrazya: Razvitie, bezopasnot, sotrudnichestvo. Ezhegodnik. Issue 1, Part 1. Moscow: INION RAN. P. 175–180.

4. Asanseitova S.M. (2018). Sovremennoe sostoyanie evrazijskoj ekonomicheskoj integratsii [Modern State of Eurasian Economic Integration]. Bolshaya Evrazya: Razvitie, bezopasnot, sotrudnichestvo. Ezhegodnik. Issue 1, Part 1. Moscow: INION RAN. P. 181–185.

5. Avanasjeva A.V. (2017). Kitasjskij biznes kak odin iz instrumentov stroitelstva Ekonomicheskogo pojasa

6. Shelkovogo puti cherez territoriu Rossij [Chinese Business as an Instrument of Silk Road Economic

7. Belt Development on the Russia’s Territory]. In Scientific conference «China-Russia Cooperation within the Project “One Belt, One Road”». Shenyang, June 23-25, 2017. Shenyang. P. 23–33.

8. Bond I. (2017). The EU, the Eurasian Economic Union and One Belt, One Road. Can they work together? London: Centre for European Reform. 13 p.

9. Bordachev T.V. (2015). Novoe evrazijstvo [The New Euroasianism]. Rossiya v global’noj politike. No. 5. P. 194–205.

10. Garlick J. (2018). Deconstructing the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor: Pipe Dreams versus Geopolitical Realities. Journal of Contemporary China. Vol. 27. Issue 110. P. 68–84.

11. Kaczmarski M. (2017). Non-western visions of regionalism: China's New Silk Road and Russia's Eurasian Economic Union. International Affairs. Vol. 93, No. 6. P. 1357–1376.

12. Karaganov S.A. (2016). S Vostoka na Zapad, ili Bol’shaya Evraziya [From East to West or Greater Eurasia]. Rossiya v global’noj politike. URL: http://www.globalaffairs.ru/pubcol/S-Vostoka-na-Zapad-ili- Bolshaya-Evraziya-18438

13. Kashin V. B., Korolyov A.S., Pyatachkova A.S. (2017). Kitajskaya politika pomoshi zarubezhnym stranam:

14. Osnovnye prinzipy i napravlenya [Chinese Foreign Aid Policy: Basic Principles and Directions]. Kitaj v mirovoj I regionalnoj politike: Istoria i sovremennost. Vol. 22, No. 22. P. 204–218.

15. Krastev I., Leonard M. (2014). Novyj evropeiskij besporyadok. Strategia ES posle Kryma [New European Disorder. EU Strategy after Crimea]. Rossija v globalnoj politike. No. 6. P. 48–63.

16. Kuprijanovskij V.P., Kurenkov P.V., Madyar O.H. (2017). Gruzopassazhirskie transportnye koridory v evro-aziatskom tsifrovom prostranstve [Passengers and Cargo Transportation Corridors in Euro-Asian Digital Space]. TRANSPORT: Nauka, technika, uplavlenie. No. 11. P. 8–17.

17. International Trends. Volume 16. No. 1 (52). January–March / 2018

18. Kuznetsova A. (2017). Greater Eurasia: Perceptions from Russia, the European Union, and China. In Schulze P. (Ed.). Core Europe and Greater Eurasia – A Roadmap for the Future. Frankfurt am Main – N.Y.: Campus Verlag. P. 177–191.

19. Ma Wencheng, Zhi Yuchen, Wang Saifeiye (2017). The Construction and Development of Asia and Africa Economic Circle under the Belt and Road Perspectives. National Think Tank. Bejing. No. 8. 106 p.

20. Mirza M., Lodhi A. (2017). The Economic Benefit of Modern Silk Road: The China – Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Joint Report of Pakistan-China Institute and ACCA. London. 41 p.

21. Pestsov S.K. (2018). Bolshaya Evrazia: chto skryvaet fasad vdokhnovlyayushej idei [Greater Eurasia: What is Hidden Behind Inspiring Idea]. Rossja i ATR. No 1. P. 8–28.

22. Pinyugina E.V. (2018). Formirovanie mezgosudarstvennykh transportnykh koridorov v Evrazii: voskhozdenie

23. Azii i okno vozhmozhnostei dlya Rossii [Formation of Inter-State Transport Corridors in Eurasia: the Rise of Asia and Opportunities for Russia]. Rossija i sovremennyi mir. No. 1. P. 68–84.

24. Popescu N. (2014). Eurasian Union: the Real, the Imaginary and the Likely. Chaillot Paper no. 132. Paris, EU Institute for Security Studies. 45 p.

25. Potapenko M.V. (2014). KNR kak novyj mezhdunarodnyj donor: osobennosti politiki sodeistvia mezhdunarodnomu razvitiu [China as Emerging Donor: Peculiarities of Intenational Development Assistance Policy]. Vestnik RUDN, ser. Mezhdunarodnye Otnoshenia. No. 1. P. 19–31.

26. Skriba A.S. (2016). Sopryazhenie EAES I Ekonomicheskogo poyasa Shelkovogo puti: interesy uchastnikov I vyzovy realizatsii [The Eurasian Economic Union and the Silk Road Economic Belt: Players, Interests and Implementation Challenges]. Vestnik mezhdunarodnikh organizatsij. No. 3. P. 67–81.

27. S derbaum F. (2003). Introduction: Theories of New Regionalism. In S derbaum F., Shaw T.M. (eds.). Theories of new regionalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 255 p.

28. Troitsky M., Charap S. (2013). Dilemma integratsii na postsovetskom prostranstve [Integration Dilemma in Post-Soviet Space]. Rossija v globalnoj politike. No. 5. P. 21–33.

29. Wang Yiwei (2016). The Belt and Road: What Will China Offer the World in Its Rise. Beijing: New World Press. 220 p.

30. Yefremenko D. V. (2014). Za flazhki. Rossja v avangarde peresmotra mirovogo poryadka [Crossing Red Lines. Russia in avant-garde of the Revision of World Order]. Rossija v globalnoj politike. No. 3. P. 8–23.

31. Yefremenko D.V. (2016). Rozhdenie bolshoi Evrazii [The Birth of Greater Eurasia]. Rossija v globalnoj politike. No. 6. P. 28–45.

32. Zank W. (2017). The Eurasian Economic Union: A Brittle Road Block on China’s “One Belt – One Road” – A Liberal Perspective. The Journal of China and International Relations. Vol. 5. No.1. 2017. P. 67–92.