Eurasian security in new reality
By Vestnik Kavkaza
The worsening of the situation in Ukraine and the misbalance of forces in the region make Russia and its allies seek new methods to stabilization of the situation. However, in the current context we cannot speak about security at a local level.
“The processes which are happening in Europe influence the situation in Asia,” Alexei Pilko, Director of the Eurasian Communicational Center, says. “There are certain challenges for Eurasian security:
First of all, these are activities of the USA and some countries of the European Union in Ukraine, which damage Eurasian security.
Secondly, there is the unsettled problem of Afghan drug trafficking and production of drugs in Afghanistan.
Thirdly, the situation in the Middle East, including the civil war in Syria.
Fourthly, attempts by the United States to revive the doctrine of containment which appeared in March 1947 in a new form and provide the policy of containment toward two major Eurasian powers – Russia and China.”
Meanwhile, Veronica Krasheninnikova, Director of the Institute of Foreign Political Studies and Initiatives, notes that “Russian diplomats try to persuade the United States and their allies that security can be only common or nothing. However, it is difficult to do. So, we will have to build security in the neighboring territory… The military factor is still acute in the world, and the situation in Crimea is a fresh example… Our activities in Ukraine and Crimea have strategic importance. This is a moment when we stopped NATO extension to the East.”
Alexei Vlasov, Executive Director of the North-South Political Scientific Center, editor-in-chief of Vestnik Kavkaza, states that “Eurasian supporters of Russia, our partners in the CSTO, the Customs Union feel pressure by the West, primarily the USA, in various directions and by internal forces, representatives of the non-governmental sector oriented at Western grants. The last are main agents of influence, who promote a special view on the situation in Crimea and Ukraine, which contradicts official positions of Astana, Bishkek, Dushanbe.”
According to Vlasov, Russia’s resistance to Western attempts to subdue the post-Soviet space has two aspects which concern problems of information security and problems of internal security of Russia’s allies: “I wouldn’t call it a phenomenon of color revolutions, as the essence of the process has changed for 10 years. The information war plays the leading role, it uses social nets, and in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan the population is highly involved into social nets.”
The level of support of the destructive ideas is minimal in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, but influence of the ideas shouldn’t be underestimated: “The situation is Ukraine is a result of the work on making people sincerely believe that by supporting the Maidan they support democratic legitimate power,” Vlasov considers. “To prevent repetition of the situation in other parts of the post-Soviet space, we should extend the notion of security. The CSTO responds to foreign risks, while a big part of threats and challenges comes from inside under financial and administrative support of foreign forces. We should consider the facts in establishing of a full-scale system of Eurasian security.”