&host=www.rt.com&uri=/news/russia-asia-europe-nikonov/&via=1.1 8.27.241.139:80 (Footprint 4.8/FPMCP)&ua=CCBot/1.0 (+http://www.commoncrawl.org/bot.html))
Russia should consider itself a Euro-Pacific power – political scientist
Published: 18 October, 2010, 15:25
Edited: 19 October, 2010, 02:45
TAGS: NATO, Asia, Russia, Interview, Europe
The most promising geo-political orientation for Russia is Euro-Pacific, says political scientist Vyacheslav Nikonov.
Russia is still looking for its identity, believes Nikonov. “Some people say that Russia is a European country: our culture is European, and our trade relations are mostly with the European Union. On the other hand, Russia is bigger than Europe, with most of its territories being in Asia,” he explains to RT .
Talking about the possibility of Russia becoming a European power, Nikonov states that although “Russia can build on its relations with the West, it is quite unrealistic to assume that it can become part of the West.”
He adds, “Russia is too big and too Russian both for the European Union and NATO; they are not very eager to see Russia inside.”
Nikonov thinks that “our priorities are East and West.”
However, the problem for Russia in the Asia-Pacific region is that it is a serious political and military player in that area, while lacking the economic strength, believes Nikonov. “For Russia the main challenge there is to become part of the Asian-Pacific market, the biggest market in the world,” he says. “And Russia is making serious steps in this direction.”
While the Western investments in Russia decreased during the crisis, the Asia-Pacific investment in Russia tripled, which is a very important development, Nikonov notes.
Speaking on the subject of relations between Russia and China, Nikonov says that as a rising superpower, second to the US, China is a challenge for everybody. “For Russia it is also a challenge of a power, rising at its borders, and a demographic pressure. Many people in Russia are scared of China’s development. But it is quite trivial to say that the relation between Russia and China today is the best ever,” he told RT.
18.10.2010, 09:22
13 comments
Children of Russia’s elite accused of living above the lawA Russian official’s daughter, who knocked down two people when driving, killing one, is facing a retrial. A Russian court says there were major violations in procedure during the first hearing. |
18.10.2010, 15:59
Arsonists target Belarusian KGB buildingMolotov cocktails have been thrown at a building housing a regional branch of the Belarusian security service (KGB). |
As they say, you can put a boat on a ship, but not a ship on a boat. That is why this analysis is quite right, that is why Russia will not be in Europe or indeed in Asia exclusively, it will always be a bridge. On one side Russia will have old european associations, on the other Asian. Like all bridges and conduits, it will add value to those that use it, paying the toll of course as they go. Russia will form aliances on both sides, but will still stand distinct. Russia does not desire or need blocks. Russia works for trade improvement and security guarantees. By anchoring both sides of the bridge on firm foundations, Russia can guarantee the bridges existence, not just through its presence, but the benefits of trade and security it brings to partner users. Russia can be in European and Asian sets at the same time, to see it in a mathematical way. Russia just due to geography is the only capable enabler of a Euro Pacific pole. Russia sees the world in terms of mutually beneficial alliances rather than idealogical religeously dogmatic blocks. This vision gives Russia agility, wheras other fixed block relationships are incapable to adapt easily to changes in world order. Because they have huge inertia. Russia's way is core principles and laws with freedom to adapt to particular circumstances and conditions. So Russia is principled based developemnt, wheras Blocks are committee script like developments. This different approach is sometimes very difficult for others to grasp who come from the 'stability' and predicatbility of commitee block decision making, where the outcome is known before the decision taken, because the decision is always the same, regardless of input parameters. Yes Russia's approach is more dynamic, more unpredicatble on the fringes, but in a way that brings a 'stability' all of its own from an opposing block. Because a block must stay the same, by definition, in an unpredicatble world, regadless if the block is rotting from inside.