Abstract
This chapter examines the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) from the perspective of the main theories in the Discipline of International Relations (IR). The author sketches out the main stages of the development of the EAEU cooperation by highlighting the conceptualization of the scheme by President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan in 1994, the establishment of the Customs Union (CU), and the Common Economic Space (CES) between Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan in 2010. Theories analyzed include Neo-Realism, Neo-Classic Realism, Hegemonic Stability Theory, Liberalism, Functionalism, Neo-Functionalism, Neo-Institutionalism, the English School, Constructivism, and Neo-Gramscian Theory. The author makes an overall evaluation and stresses the need for an eclectic approach for analyzing the EAEU experience.
TopIntroduction
In terms of both its theory and practice, the discipline of International Relations (IR) has been shaped by a narrow focus on the Euro-Atlantic region. In modern times, Anglo-Saxon powers have set the main rules of the international order. Consequently, the theoretical frameworks have been dominantly developed to account for their behaviors. The integration theories in IR illustrate this point well. Whereas Functionalism of David Mitrany and Neo-Functionalism of Ernst Haas center on the experience of the European Union (EU), Karl Deutsch’s concept of security community focuses on the experience of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). However, the center of gravity is shifting towards Eurasia now. Moreover, we have recently seen many developments that cast doubt on the Euro-Atlantic integration and cooperation, such as BREXIT and Trump's harsh criticisms on NATO. In this context, IR theories on integration need to pay close attention to the integration and regional cooperation in Eurasia.
For the researchers focusing on Eurasia, integration schemes and regionalism are hotly debated issues. As the main framework of integration in the region, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) attracts remarkable attention from academic circles. The high number of studies examining the subject illustrates the significance of the issue. However, there are only a very limited number of studies with a theoretical perspective. Moreover, the existing studies with a theoretical insight examine the EAEU by relying on a single theoretical tradition. They predominantly utilize Realism to analyze the subject. Due to avoiding an eclectic approach, the literature is devoid of a rich analytical tool to account for the Eurasian integration. It is necessary to go beyond the existing studies and utilize an eclectic approach, which is aware of the strengths and weaknesses of all relevant theories in IR.
This study aims to examine the EAEU from the perspective of the main theories in International Relations (IR). It follows an eclectic approach in examining the subject. The objective is to shed light on the explanatory power of each IR theory covered by the study. The study eschews giving precedence to an IR theory over others. The theories used for analyzing the EAEU are Neo-Realism, Neo-Classic Realism, Liberalism, Functionalism, Neo-Functionalism, English School, Constructivism, and Neo-Gramscian Theory.
The Global IR Approach of Acharya is a source of inspiration for the study. This approach calls for taking previously ignored sources of IR knowledge into account and integrating the study of regions and regionalisms into the main concerns of IR. Acharya also urges the IR community to move beyond Eurocentric regionalism and Westphalian world vision and consider the features of the emerging post-Western world order (Acharya, 2014, p. 647). Following this advice, the study focuses on regionalism in the Eurasian region to see in what ways this relatively less studied part of the world can contribute to the study of IR.
The study is structured as follows. After the literature review in the following section, the third section first sketches out the main stages of the development of the EAEU cooperation by highlighting the conceptualization of the scheme by President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan in 1994, the establishment of the Customs Union (CU) and the Common Economic Space (CES) between Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan in 2010. Afterward, the section analyzes the EAEU from the perspective of IR theories. The theoretical analysis comprises Neo-Realism, Neo-Classic Realism, Hegemonic Stability Theory, Liberalism, Functionalism, Neo-Functionalism, Neo-Institutionalism, the English School, Constructivism, and Neo-Gramscian Theory. The conclusion makes an overall evaluation and stresses the need for an eclectic approach for analyzing the EAEU experience.
Key Terms in this Chapter
Customs Union: Customs Union is a kind of arrangement that removes or reduces the tariff barriers between two or more participant states while keeping tariff barriers against imports coming from the non-participants ( Viner, 2014 , p. 2).
Regionalism: The concept refers to the intensification of political and/or economic cooperation among states and other actors in a certain geographic region. It includes different aspects of regional cooperation, such as the growth of social and economic interaction and the formation of regional identity and consciousness. The increasing flow of goods, people, ideas, and money bring about regionalism by making the region more integrated and cohesive. Regionalism can come from below (in the form of decisions of companies to invest in the region or of people to move in the region) or from above (in the form of political and state-led efforts to establish regional bodies and formulate common policies) ( Roach, Griffiths & O'Callaghan, 2014 AU26: The citation "Roach, Griffiths & O'Callaghan, 2014" matches the reference "Roach et al, 2014", but an accent or apostrophe is different. , pp. 280-282).
Hegemony: Hegemony is a preponderance of power in the international system of one state in a way enabling it to dominate the rules and arrangements which shape the international political and economic relations. The state with such kind of power is called a hegemon. Hegemony generally refers to supremacy on a global scale, however, sometimes it can also refer to regional domination ( Goldstein and Pevehouse, 2014 , pp. 57-58).
Integration: Integration mainly means intergovernmental cooperation through international organizations and treaties ( Vinokurov & Libman, 2014 , p. 355). It makes sense to view integration as a process. This process starts with increasing cooperation between the states. It continues with a gradual transfer of authority to supranational institutions, a gradual homogenization of values; and the emergence of new forms of political community. The final destination is the emergence of a federation composed of states in the region ( Roach, Griffiths & O'Callaghan, 2014 AU22: The citation "Roach, Griffiths & O'Callaghan, 2014" matches the reference "Roach et al, 2014", but an accent or apostrophe is different. , p. 170).
Regionalization: Regionalization can be defined as intensification of intra-regional social and economic interactions ( Goltermann, Lohaus, Spielau & Striebinger, 2016 , p. 5).
Protectionism: An economic policy aiming at protecting domestic industries from international competition. It is generally implemented by levying taxes, tariffs and quotas on imports ( Devetak, George & Percy, 2017 , p. 3065).
Region: Regions are composed of groupings of territorial units geographically close to each other (Hurrell 1995 AU23: The in-text citation "Hurrell 1995" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. , pp. 333-334, Sbragia 2008 AU24: The in-text citation "Sbragia 2008" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. quoted in Goltermann, Lohaus, Spielau & Striebinger, 2016 , pp. 4-5). However, for the students of international relations, the term has a different meaning going beyond geography. Regions are characterized by a certain degree of mutual interdependence (Nye, 1968 AU25: The in-text citation "Nye, 1968" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. quoted in Goltermann, Lohaus, Spielau & Striebinger, 2016 , p. 5). Some writers also view the term from the Constructivist perspective and argue that regions are socially constructed spatial ideas that are based on the shared features of cultural identity like religion and language ( Goltermann, Lohaus, Spielau & Striebinger, 2016 , p. 5).