592I. Gurova (igurova@mail.ru),
MGIMO University, 76, Prosp. Vernadskogo, Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation
Abstract. The former Soviet republics of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, for which the EU established the Eastern Partnership program, are involved in the orbit of the EU and the EAEU integration processes. The concept of integration competition suggests that the EU and Russia, which is the dominant power in the EAEU, should be considered as rivals in this matter. Six target countries found themselves in a situation of integration choice, which in some cases can manifest itself in the form of an integration dilemma that does not leave the third path. Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine have already signed Association Agreements/DCFTA with the EU, while Belarus and Armenia are members of the EAEU. The indicators of economic dependence, trade integration and asymmetry in trade demonstrate that the trade and economic priorities of these countries are changing. Trade and economic relations with the EU and with Russia are asymmetric, which is due to a significant gap in the scale of the economy. Moreover, the more partners trade, the deeper the asymmetry. The least dependent on both Russia and the EU is Georgia. With a fairly high level of trade integration with the EU, the country has a diversified geographic structure of trade and actively trades with third countries. Economic dependence and trade integration of Moldova and Ukraine with the EU has increased significantly due to the reduction of ties with Russia. In this case, the integration choice is a dilemma, as one powerful partner displaces the other partner. In Armenia, which accessed the EAEU, on the contrary, Russia ousts the EU. Belarus avoided the integration dilemma. Having the most open economy, the country simultaneously increases trade with Russia, the EU and third countries. The article is aimed at developing the trade and economic aspect of the concept of integration competition and overcoming the fatalism of the “dilemma of integration”.
Keywords: EU, Russia, Eastern Partnership, economic dependency, asymmetry in trade, import share in GDP
REFERENCES
1. EU Eastern Partnership (In Russ.) Available at: http://www.euneighbours.eu/ru (accessed 14.05.2017).
2. Eastern Partnership. Platform 2 “Economic Integration and Convergence with EU Policies”. Work Programme 2014–2017. Available at: https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/platform_2_work_programme_2014-2017_0.pdf (accessed 14.05.2017).
3. Vinokurov E., Libman A. Dve evraziiskie integratsii [Two Integration Processes in Eurasia]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2013, no. 2, pp. 47-72.
4. Gurova I.P. O mnogomernoi modeli evraziiskoi ekonomicheskoi integratsii [Multidimensional Model of the Eurasian Economic Integration]. Prostranstvennaya ekonomika, 2016, no. 1, pp. 14-29. DOI:10.14530/se.2016.1.014-029
5. Golovnin M. Yu., Zakharov A.V., Ushkalova D.I. Ekonomicheskaya integratsiya: uroki dlya postsovetskogo prostranstva [Economic Integration: Lessons for the Post-Soviet Space]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 2016, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 61-69.
6. Golovnin M. Yu. Rossiya i integratsionnye ob”edineniya stran “poyasa sosedstva” [System Integration Projects in Russia in the “Neighborhood Zone”]. Rossiiskii vneshneekonomicheskii vestnik, 2012, no. 11, pp. 10-24.
7. Glinkina S.P. Konkurentsiya integratsionnykh proektov na postsovetskom prostranstve [Competition between Integration Projects in Post-Soviet Space]. Problemy teorii i praktiki upravleniya, 2013, no. 12, pp. 65-79.
8. Spartak A.N., Vinokurov E. Ju., Kulik S.A., Chernyshev S.V., Jurgens I. Ju. Konflikt dvukh integratsii [Conflict between Two Integrations]. Moscow, Econ-Inform Publ., 2015. 241 p.
9. Vasfilov D.S. Sistemnyi analiz vzaimodeistviya Rossii i Evropeiskogo soyuza na postsovetskom prostranstve [Systems Analysis of Interaction between Russia and the European Union in the Post-Soviet space]. Vestnik mezhdunarodnykh organizatsii, 2014, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 31-46.
10. Skriba A.S. Vyzovy i perspektivy evraziiskoi integratsii posle ukrainskogo krizisa [Challenges of Eurasian Integration after the Ukrainian Crisis]. Vestnik mezhdunarodnykh organizatsii, 2014, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 96-111.
11. EU and Russia: Before and Beyond the Crisis in Ukraine: House of Lords Paper 115 Session 2014-15 (House of Lords Session 2014-15). Published by the Authority of the House of Lords. February 2015. Available at: https://www.publications.parliament.uk (accessed 14.05.2017).
12. Durdyeva, A.A. Dilemma integratsii na evraziiskom prostranstve v kontekste ukrainskih sobytii [Integration Dilemma within the Eurasian Space in the Context of the Ukrainian Crisis]. Vestnik MGIMO Universiteta, 2015, no. 3 (42), pp. 134-140.
13. Kharlamova G. The European Union and the Eastern Partnership: Convergence of Economies. Procedia Economics and Finance, 2015, no. 27, pp. 29-41. DOI:10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00968-5
14. Glinkina S.P., Kulikova N.V. Strany Tsentral’no-Vostochnoi Evropy v Evropeiskom soyuze: sostoitsya li konvergentsiya? [Central and East European Countries in the European Union: Will Convergence Take Place?]. Belorusskii ekonomicheskii zhurnal, 2015, no. 2, pp. 24-32.
15. Crescenzi M.J. Economic Interdependence and Conflict in World Politics. Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina, 2002. 276 p.
16. X Russian International Studies Association Convention “25 Years of Russia’s Foreign Policy”. Section 8.1. Russia in the World Economic System. Moscow, MGIMO, December 8–9, 2016 (In Russ.) Available at: http://www.risa.ru/ru/sections/274-8-1 (accessed 12.08.2017).
17. Single Market Scoreboard. Integration and Market Openness. Trade in Goods and Services (Reporting Period: 2013–2014) European Commission (2016). Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/single-market-scoreboard (accessed 14.05.2017).
18. UNCTADStat. Available at: http://unctadstat.unctad.org (accessed 14.05.2017).
19. World Development Indicators. Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator (accessed 01.08.2017).
20. Gurova I.P., Efremova M.V. Vnutriotraslevaya i mezhotraslevaya torgovlya SNG [Intra-Industry and Inter-Industry Trade in the CIS Region]. Evraziiskaya ekonomicheskaya integratsiya, 2012, no. 3 (16), pp. 30-39.
21. Dragneva R., Wolczuk K. Between Dependence and Integration: Ukraine’s Relations with Russia. Europe-Asia Studies, 2016, vol. 68, iss. 4, pp. 678-698. DOI:10.1080/09668136.2016.1173200
22. Olarua S. The Strategy and the Reasons of the Republic of Moldova’s Association with European Union. Procedia Economics and Finance, 2014, no. 16, pp. 381-390. DOI:10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00817-X
23. Evaluation of the Impact of the Free Trade Agreement on Sustainable Development in Order to Support the DCFTA Negotiations between the EU and the Republic of Moldova. Technical Interim Report. Variant of the Project. Customer: European Commission – Directorate General for Trade. Rotterdam, April 14, 2012 (In Russ.) Available at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/february/tradoc_150565.pdf (accessed 14.05.2017).
24. Spartak A.N. Napravleniya i stsenarii vzaimodeistviya Rossii i Belarusi v formate Soyuznogo gosudarstva [Fields and Scenarios of Russia and Belarus Interaction in the Framework of the Union State]. Vestnik Instituta ekonomiki Rossiiskoi akademii nauk, 2016, no. 3, pp. 126-157.
25. Vinokurov E. Eurasian Economic Union: Current State and Preliminary Results. Russian Journal of Economics, 2017, no. 3, pp. 54-70. DOI:10.1016/j.ruje.2017.02.004
26. Bayramov V. Considering Accession to the Eurasian Economic Union: for Azerbaijan, Disadvantages Outweigh Advantages. Available at: http://www.css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-for-securities-studies/pdfs/CAD-51-52-14-16.pdf (accessed 14.05.2017).
Registered in System SCIENCE INDEX
No comments