Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan Sign Eurasian Union Treaty

Thursday, May 29, 2014

ASTANA, May 29 (RIA Novosti) – The presidents of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan have signed a treaty to create the Eurasian Economic Union (EAU), with a target date of January 1, 2015.

The binding treaty is expected to raise the three nations to a higher level of integration. The three countries have committed to guaranteeing the free movement of goods, services, capital and labor as well as the implementation of coordinated policies in key sectors including energy, industry, agriculture and transportation.

The accord was inked during Thursday’s session of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council in Astana, Kazakhstan. The council regulates the Eurasian Economic Community created by several former Soviet states in the 1990s.

The agreement will finalize the establishment of the CIS’s largest common market, which is slated to become a new economic powerhouse.

Bids from other potential member states were also considered at the meeting, including from Armenia and Kyrgyzstan. The Armenian president today said his country hoped to sign the Eurasian Economic Union Treaty by June 15.

The Eurasian Economic Union was conceived of as an EU-style bloc aimed at promoting integration and free trade between its three member states, Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus, with more countries to follow.



Anonymous said...

Momentous Russia-Syria agreement by Voltaire Network

A large Russian delegation arrived in Damascus last week. It was headed by Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin and comprised Deputy Finance Minister Sergei Storchak and Alexander Fomin, Director of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation.

The Russian-Syrian Intergovernmental Commission met both in a plenary session and in working groups in a friendly and relaxed atmosphere.

Taken up by the Ukraine crisis, over the past two months Russia appeared to be absent from the Middle East. This visit marks its return to the region and its new policy towards "the West."

Three important decisions were reportedly adopted at the economic, military and financial levels:
- In 2015, the Eurasian Economic Commission will create a free trade zone with the Customs Union (Russia - Belarus -Kazakhstan ) which will include Syria.
- The Russian Federation will continue to deliver weapons authorized by the UN Security Council. The Syrian Defense Minister, Fahd Jassem al-Freij, will travel to Moscow in August to sign a detailed treaty of cooperation between the two states. It is expected to involve the extension of Russia’s military base in the port of Tartus as well as Syria’s access to Russian satellite images.
- The Russian Federation should largely foot the bill for the reconstruction of Syria, so that she will not be constrained to sell the passage of Saudi and Qatari gas pipelines on its soil.

Anonymous said...

Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan sign ‘epoch' Eurasian Economic Union

...The troika of countries will cooperate in energy, industry, agriculture, and transport...
"In fact, we are shaping the largest common market in the CIS, with huge production, scientific and technological potential and enormous natural resources," the President added.

Citizens of Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan will have the right to work freely throughout the member states without having to be issued any special work permits,...
The Customs Union is a project to gather ex-Soviet states into a free trade zone to rival the European Union. The three member states of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan only comprise 2.5 percent to the Earth’s population, but account for 15 percent of the total land.

"The geographical position permits us to create transport, logistic routes of not only regional, but also global importance that permits attracting massive trade flows in Europe and Asia," Putin said ahead of the signing ceremony in Astana, Kazakhstan on Thursday.

All member states will retain full state sovereignty. Russia is financing the lion’s share of the administration, but each state will have a one-third voting status...

How Long Will Europe Pay Tribute to USA?

... This is another good example of well-known US practice of resorting to double standards, something much talked about these days. Washington is obviously trying to push Russia out of Europe, undermine the economic ties between Russia and the United States and make Europeans join the Transatlantic Free Trade Zone (TAFTA) making their economies become overtly or covertly dependent on the US.

According to Italian La Bussola Quotidiana, the US exerts pressure on the European Union in order to achieve three goals: to reduce the European dependence on Russian gas, to make the EU suspend trade ties with Moscow, especially the dual purpose goods, and to make the European Union increase its military spending.

The US wants Europe to use shale gas which is more costly than the Russian pipeline energy supplies. Europeans are to pay for Euro Atlantic solidarity to enrich US energy corporations. In other words, the EU is to pay tribute to the United States. If it does, then who should Moscow talk to in Europe?

If transatlantic partnership presupposes higher gas prices, the European economy will become less competitive increasing its dependence on the United States. Russia will invest into Asia. The implementation of Asian projects will take years. The United States will be an undisputable winner. Now what will the European Union get? Nobody has said anything in concrete terms about it, neither economists, nor politicians.

The Russian military-industrial cooperation has been going upward in recent years: Italy has acquired Lince blast-resistant armored patrol vehicles produced in Russia under license, France has signed a contract for selling two Mistral amphibious assault ships. As in the case of energy sector, the United States pursues the same goal – to squeeze Russia out and make Europeans buy what is produced in America turning the European Union into a market to consume US-made goods...

Anonymous said...

Another nail in coffin of US empire

The economic union signed this week between Russia and its near neighbors, Belarus and Kazakhstan, spells another nail in the coffin of the waning US global hegemony.

Russian President Vladimir Putin signed off on the Eurasian Economic Union in the Kazakh capital, Astana, along with his counterparts, Alexander Lukashenko and Nursultan Nazarbayev.

There was evident, sincere camaraderie between the three leaders. Putin called the new union a “landmark of historic significance” while the Kazakh leader Nazarbayev declared “a new geopolitical reality of the 21st century is born.”

This is no exaggeration. The Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), which comes into effect in January 2015, is another sign of the paradigm shift in the global economy and international relations. This shift heralds the rise of the European-Asian axis and the further demise of the crumbling US-dominated West.

The signing of the EEU this week follows the strategic energy partnership between Russia and China that came into being last week. The latter entails the coupling of the world’s biggest oil and gas producer with the globe’s largest market.

Of crucial importance, these Eastern alignments integrate not just energy, but wider aspects of trade, finance and military alliance. Moreover, the gradual integration is outside the US dollar system and thus will greatly undermine the long-abused American hegemony over the rest of the world.

The Eurasian pivot in world affairs embodied by the signing in Astana this week is not an isolated moment. It represents a dynamic of huge re-orientation, away from the US-dominated West.

Other countries that are aiming to join the EEU include the former Soviet states of Armenia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. In a few years’ time, it is not difficult to foresee how this oil and gas-rich region could evolve into a new energy bloc that would eventually oust the Saudi-dominated OPEC cartel. OPEC is a lynchpin in the US dollar monopoly over international trade...
The EEA is based on mutual sovereignty and a genuine partnership to develop economies and societies along democratic principles, led by governments that are committed to serve the good of their people – as opposed to the Western servility to an elite financial oligarchy. The EEA is a government-planned management of agriculture, commerce, energy, labor and capital to serve the interests of social development and the needs of the real economy.

This is why, of course, Washington is quaking-scared about the kind of strategic union forming between Russia and its neighbors.

Without any credible rationale, Washington is claiming that Putin is trying to revive the old Soviet Union...
The Eurasian Economic Union signed this week is another nail in Washington’s coffin as it sinks inexorably to a watery grave. Good riddance.

Anonymous said...

An excellent Geopolitical analysis of Europe going back to WW1.

Lessons and Consequences of World War I : Back to the Future? by Andrew Korybko

...History is being reinterpreted for short-term political points, forgetting that the British intent of the original conflict was for a long-term and farsighted transformation of the European (at the time, recognized as “global”) power arrangement. Of course, not everything turned out as intended, and dark horses emerged to offset these carefully crafted plans and/or reap undeserved dividends. No matter that one hundred years has already passed, the same geostrategic objective is the same – the seafaring powers must utilize all methods (including intrigue and massive bloodletting) to prevent the continental powers from colluding against them. The continuum of history eerily shows that shadows of the past still hang over the head of the future, and the thematic lessons leading up to and following World War I still dangerously ring true today...
The UK and Germany were engaged in a fierce naval armaments race up until the eve of World War I. Although the British Navy was supreme, Germany was clearly a rising threat to this hegemony. Additionally, Germany and Austria-Hungary were the masters of Central Europe and Russia controlled the Heartland (essentially ‘winning’ the Great Game). Russian historian Nikolay Starikov brilliantly argues that the UK, using its centuries-long diplomatic expertise (and cunningness) in great power balancing, instigated Germany and Russia into war after the events of Sarajevo in order to destroy its two greatest foes (in different Eurasian theaters) in one fell swoop...
Brzezinski, writing in “The Grand Chessboard” in 1997, cautions American decision makers about the possibility (then distant, today more realistic) of a German-Russian alliance that would isolate America from Europe, and thus, collapse America’s Eurasian strategy. Accommodating for this geopolitical reality, it now makes sense why there is so much Western guilt mongering against Germany for supposedly starting World War I – the objective is to keep Germany and Russia divided and prevent their future policy coordination. The spate of Color Revolutions is aimed solely at penetrating the former Soviet Heartland and removing Russia from the Great Power game. On the naval front, the US is trying to bait China into a disastrous collision course with its Southeast Asian neighbors over disputed maritime territories.
...The combination of sea and land power, properly coordinated and applied across Eurasia, is the basic formula for global control.
...The UK had historically been the prima donna of balance of power and divide and rule policies in Europe, and it played this role perfectly in the lead-up to World War I. As outlined by Starikov, UK Foreign Secretary Edward Grey diligently played all the continental powers off against one another in order for his country to reap the anticipated benefits of a continental Hobbesian conflict...
The double standards of self-determination and ethnic nationalism are perhaps the most dangerous hypocrisies of the past century. After World War I, the victorious powers played a balancing game over ethnic blood. Their double standard was intended to reshape the map of Europe to their own liking, empowering some and handicapping others. Ironically, some states felt both effects. This was brought about by linking and separating various ethnic groups, uniting some while creating diasporas out of others.

Ethnic groups that were forcibly divided:
- Germans (Treaty of Versailles)
- Hungarians (Treaty of Trianon)

Ethnic groups allowed to be united:
- Poles
- Romanians

Fake state:
- Czechoslovakia

The Germans and Hungarians sought to change this artificial balance of ethnic distribution, hence one of the causes of World War II...

Anonymous said...

Paul Craig Roberts discusses the GeoPolitical situation in Eastern Europe.

Paul Craig Roberts - The Crisis in Ukraine & The Geopolitical Chess Game

Paul Craig Roberts has had careers in scholarship and academia, journalism, public service, and business. Roberts is probably best known for being the Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury for Economic Policy in the Reagan Administration. He was associate editor and columnist with the Wall Street Journal, columnist for Business Week and the Scripps Howard News Service. He is a contributing editor to Gerald Celente's Trends Journal. He is the author of numerous books, including his most recent, How America Was Lost: From 9/11 to the Police/Warfare State. He is currently chairman of The Institute for Political Economy. In this program, we discuss the neo-con’s war agenda and how the Ukraine fits into the Wolfowitz doctrine. We talk about the violent Coup d'état in Kiev and who has been the driving factor behind the illegitimate takeover of the country. Paul also discusses the inconsistencies in the various political factions that have been helping each other in order to take control of the Ukraine. Washington’s willingness to work with anyone, including criminals, in order to achieve their goals is no big surprise but is speaks volumes about their ambitions to remain in power. Later, we discuss Putin’s Russia and how vastly different the roles are today, than just 25 years ago and what the grudge between the west’s elite and Russia is about. Paul explains how the USA is losing more and more influence around the world. He paints a picture of no more superpowers and what power dynamic will replace it. Later, we discuss the future of the American dollar, multicultural madness in Europe and the next step in the geopolitical chess game.

Anonymous said...

Excellent Geopolitical Analysis Part 2.

The Lessons and Consequences of World War I: Back to the Future? (II)


1914labelIn accordance with Nikolay Starikov’s argument, the UK’s intention in escalating the Sarajevo events into a European war was to eliminate two of its primary rivals simultaneously, Germany and Russia. London anticipated itself having a free hand to dictate its will all across Eurasia, from Berlin to Baghdad and from the Barents Sea to the Bering Sea. History, however, would not have it that way, and a few notable black horses reared themselves on to the scene:

* The US entered World War I and was able to have deciding power in the makeup of post-World War I Europe. The UK was no longer the king of the continent, and from that moment onwards, its global sway began to relatively decrease as America’s rose.

* Japan, observing from afar how the European fratricide was weakening the collective power of the colonial states, took some German Pacific territories and set its designs on larger pan-Asian conquests less than two decades later.

* Russia rose from the ashes, internally transformed as the Soviet Union but externally similar to its Imperial boundaries.

* The Turks waged what they identify as a war of independence, overturning the Treaty of Sevres (which sought to carve up European spheres of influence in Anatolia) and replacing it with the Treaty of Lausanne.

These four dark horses were unpredictable in 1914, yet by 1924, they came to define a significant part of the international arena.

Why It Matters Now:

Just as the British gambit for power in fomenting the opening salvos of World War I led to the unexpected emergence of several power centers, so too did the US’ unipolar debacle after the end of the Cold War. China, who the US had allied with in order to counter the USSR, experienced the fastest economic rise in the history of mankind, and it is on pace to surpass the US’ economy this year. Russia once more rose from its knees, with Putin returning the country to its historic great power status after the 1990s decade of downturns. In fact, both Russia and China are now enjoying the best state of mutual relations in their history. This has led them to coordinate their policies in the UN, BRICS, APEC, and the Mideast and North Africa. Clearly, this is not how American policy planners anticipated their “unipolar” world looking back in 1991. In fact, the multipolar future is growing out of the unipolar past, and the process appears to be irreversible now...

Part 1:

Post a Comment

Comments using obscene language, or comments calling for hate and violence will be deleted.