External Drivers of Institutional Change in Central Asia – Regional Integration Schemes and the Role of Russia and China (original) (raw)
Related papers
Do Russia and China promote autocracy in Central Asia?
Asia Europe Journal, 2012
The purpose of our paper is to contribute to the literature on autocracy promotion by analyzing Central Asia as the most-likely case, considering both Russia and China as relevant external actors. We develop a concept for our analysis based on the different strategies of Russia and China towards the region and present the results of a qualitative study of the main dimensions of autocracy promotion (regional organizations, economic cooperation, and interference and threat). Based on this qualitative study, we define variables measuring the potential for autocracy promotion and test our hypotheses using panel data for 24 post-communist countries. The somewhat surprising result of our analysis is that, in contrast to Russia's dominance mode of operation, China's doing-business approach towards its neighbors in Central Asia may have-although unintentionally-even positive effects in terms of improving governance and undermining autocratic structures. overcome structural impediments for democracy , this challenge is considerable in the case of Central Asia because the countries are governed by personalized power, elite patronage, and informal processes of political and economic decision-making. In addition, as a combination of weak offers and reluctance to comply with demands, both EU and NATO remain rather weak players in the region. 1 The purpose of our paper is to analyze Central Asia as a most likely case of autocracy promotion. In the "Three dimensions of autocracy promotion in Central Asia" section, we analyze three dimensions of autocracy promotion relevant for Russian and/or Chinese neighborhood policies: through leadership or participation in regional organizations (partly similar), through economic cooperation (different), and more direct interference and threat (Russia only). In the "Empirical evidence from panel data" section, we determine indicators representing these dimensions and provide econometric evidence based on panel data. Overall, we could confirm autocracy promotion for Russia's dominance approach, while China's doingbusiness approach could as well (indirectly) promote democratization. "Summary and policy conclusions" section summarizes our results.
The region that isn't: China, Russia and the failure of regional integration in Central Asia
Asia Europe Journal
The failure of regionalism in Central Asia is a puzzle. Whereas almost all world regions have seen a rise of regional organisations since the end of the Cold War, attempts to establish durable regional cooperation among Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan proofed unsuccessful. Although some of the Central Asian countries participate in wider regional organisations like the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), the genuine Central Asian Cooperation Organisation (CACO) was dissolved in 2005. Given the cultural, economic and political similarities between the five Central Asian countries, this lack of a regional organisation is surprising. In contrast to previous work, this paper argues that the failure of regionalism in Central Asia is not so much due to domestic political factors, but more to the extra-regional economic dependence of the regional economies and the impact of external powers within Central Asia. Challenged by the rise of China, Russia uses the EAEU in order to preserve its hegemonic influence over the former Soviet Republics. By joining the Russian dominated EAEU, Central Asia's regional power Kazakhstan enjoys economic benefits which outweigh the potential gains of Central Asian cooperation within CACO by far. Consequently, Kazakhstan follows its extra-regional interests in closer cooperation with Russia at the cost of regional cooperation with its Central Asian neighbours. As a result, the Central Asian countries are unable to build up a unified regional block in relation to extra-regional powers like China or Russia.
Autocracies and regional integration: the Eurasian case
Libman A., Vinokurov E. (2018) Autocracies and Regional Integration: the Eurasian Case. Post-Communist Economies, 30 (3), 334-364., 2018
The establishment of the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan in 2010, succeeded by the Eurasian Economic Union in 2015, constituted an important discontinuity in the development of post-Soviet regionalism: while the preceding organisations remained cases of 'ink-on-paper' regional integration, in the case of the Customs Union the members actually implemented their commitments. This creates an important theoretical challenge: the literature (which the previous experience of Eurasian regionalism was very much in line with) conjectures that authoritarian states are unable to successfully implement an economic regional integration agreement (RIA). The aim of the article is to explore the conditions under which implementation of economic RIAs by autocracies happens. We argue that the implementation is influenced by the extent of economic, social and political ties between member states, and suggest that, unlike democratic states, which are more likely to implement a RIA where there are strong economic ties, non-democracies are more likely to do so in the case of intermediate economic dependence.
Polity, 2020
In recent years, the Central Asian countries (CACs) have received increasing attention from international research and political communities. After gaining independence in 1991, the CACs went through diverse processes of political and economic transformations. However, the political and economic evolutions of these countries diverged substantially from what the Western community expected, especially in terms of regional economic cooperation. This article contends that the Central Asian countries have never been part of the currently decomposing system of liberal hegemony. Instead, they have followed divergent paths of transition, which have hindered regional and international cooperation. Additionally, during recent years, the region has become a complex arena in which national goals coexist with the interests of the major regional powers, Russia and China. Therefore, the evolution of the Central Asian countries over the last decades provides an example of the varied and complex nature of regionalism in a post liberal world. This article uses an international political economy approach to address the complex interaction between the economic and political fields, both locally and internationally.
COMU International Journal of Social Sciences , 2019
Great and regional powers have been trying to influence/control Central Asia’s (CA) political-economic fabric and development for the sake of their own strategic interests via different politico-economic schemes. Especially, Russia, China and the US are competing to inject their individual regional integration models for reducing the influence of other great and regional powers. These models fall in the category of extra-regional integration projects, which promote different structured approaches. This paper explores the viability and major impacts of great power-induced regional integration and their repercussions. It argues that these projects are developed by and biased towards preserving the influence of major powers, and lack viable framework to bring both global and regional players into a path of long-term cooperation. Even if the great powers’ regional integration approaches are divergent from each other, their common point the asymmetry they apply when they are approaching the region. Primarily they prioritized their own strategic interests while discarding CA states’ expectations to a significant extent. However, if implemented successfully, it cannot be ruled out that these projects may bring socioeconomic benefits to CA countries at the expense of political independence.
Whither development? The effects of the Eurasian Union on the Central Asian Republics
In this paper I analyze the impact of the Eurasian Union on the Central Asian republics, with a focus on remittances trends. To this end I review at first the literature regarding the effects of the Customs Union on its members. Then, I assess the current state of the economies most likely to be affected by membership in the Eurasian Union, i.e. Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, whose specificity is their dependency on remittances. Secondly, I present a plausible scenario in regard to the influence of the formalization of this regional organization on the emerging Central Asian regional security subcomplex. I argue that the EEU is a hindrance towards the five Central Asian Republics' evolving towards a regional security complex. Not only has it already distorted trade in the region, but it can also turn some presently frozen conflicts into security hotspots. I hold that the only way to spur development in the region is, internally, to diversify the economy, and, externally, to bring the five republics closer. I try to show that the Central Asian Republics should simultaneously pursue a switch from a balance of threat to regional integration and sustainable national development. Nonetheless, the EEU will have at best mixed effects when it comes to these necessities. Alternatively, China and the New Silk Road initiative that it endorses might contribute to de-securitizing some of the existing issues. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, its former republics had an opportunity to become once again integrated in the world economy. However, the legacy of the USSR precluded this to a certain extent [1] and, instead of openness and liberalization, there was isolation and perpetuation of corrupt ruling classes. What should have been a departure from the Soviet system was only a simulacrum in key aspects. Furthermore, ethnic tensions erupted, culminating with a Civil War in 1 I thank an anonymous reviewer for pointing out to me that we cannot explain the current state of affairs solely by referring to the inheritance of the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, as I will show in my discussion on security issues in the region, this inheritance has been highly influential for the subsequent development of the countries in the region and this is why I mentioned it here (with the caveat that it is not the only factor to be considered).
The Impact of Post-Communist Central Asia’s Internal Dynamics on its External Relations
Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Studies
Under the Soviet Union rule, Central Asia was a closed region with no access to the outside world. Both internal and external affairs in the region was directed by the central government in Moscow. When the Central Asian republics became dependence in 1991, the situation changed.Yet, in the new era Central Asia has faced many problems and challenges. This paper aims to explore how Central Asia’s internal dynamics have influenced its external relations? The paper concludes that the region’s external relations have been greatly affected by its internal dynamics.