Bakhtiyor Ergashev
|
Dear colleagues!
I want to invite you for participation in the discussion on very important, in my opinion, topic. More than 13 years have elapsed since the USSR collapsed.
During all these years the integration issue remains one of the most pressing.
Policy-makers, journalists, researchers have been discussing, talking and investigating the issue, but: the more attention is drawn to it the more obstacles such as closing of borders and complicated entrance procedures occurred. The existing organizations for integration are looking like reanimation patients.
The discussion is an attempt to answer easy, and at the same time, stirring questions:
1. What reason caused the failure of integration efforts in Central Asia in the post soviet era?
2. If the ways and mechanisms of integration process appropriate?
3. Similarities of the Central Asian countries economies have not play the role of a basis for consolidation. Is it possible now to integrate when economies and political systems has changed.
4. What type of integration do we need?
I would like to make my observations on the role, importance and potential of our region.
Community of the five Central Asian countries can be in full measure recognized as a region. This geographical space is shaped as by natural borders determined in topographical parameters, so with historical and cultural processes that are common for all countries of the region. The Central Asian region from the geopolitical point of view is formed with the five states amounting more than 4 million square kilometers territory and 60 million people population; with enormous stocks of oil, gas, nonferrous metals, other valuable mineral resources, vast irrigated lands and pastures.
The integrated Central Asia could become one of the fastest developing regions in the territory of the former Soviet Union. Similar issues in economies and policies, and traditionally established industrial and social ties create real prerequisites for close cooperation, significant reduction of transition costs and elimination of difficulties caused with a market transformation process.
However, it is evident that the common religion and history, and related languages could serve as a basis for cultural cooperation only, but not for political one. And failure of the regional integration is a glaring example.
What are the reasons?
There are a lot of factors, external and inside, that keep back the process of the Central Asian integration. They are:
1. Different models and inequality in pace of reforms in the countries of Central Asia;
2. Noticeable distinctions in the national legislations;
3. Not similar concepts of outward orientation;
4. Distinctions in priorities, interests of the national elites;
5. Rivalry of the countries' leaders;
6. The external influence factor;
7. Incompleteness of the interstate relations system.
Alongside with the mentioned factors, one of the main reasons of the Central Asian integration failure could be that official arrangements and agreements on interaction within the region didn't follow the evolutionary development of relations, they even forestalled them.
Being integrated, the governments preferred to relay on a strongly structured and officially supported relations and unions. And accordingly, integration institutions have been initially establishing as a kind of the formal bodies deprived of real filling.
They were some kind of <outstripping projects>. In our opinion, the contrary is correct: official establishment and registration of interrelations among the region countries should be performed when the relations become stronger.
Besides, success of integration depends on so-called locomotive countries (as France and Germany in EU). But neither Uzbekistan, nor Kazakhstan (as the two largest countries of the region) could not (or have not wanted) to play the role of the regional integration locomotive.
The unsuccessful Central Asian integration we evidence today, results in:
I. The process of decomposition and degradation of the countries disintegrated economies, which have the interconnected character.
II. Weakness of integration that threatens social stability of the Central Asian states;
III. Absence of the common policy in coordinating of problems that brings to strengthening of contradictions among the states.
At the same time, we recognize, that despite of the all ambiguity of the countries positions in regard to the regional integration, and alongside with huge problems in this process, there are significant factors, which serve as a basis for and promote the idea of the Central Asian integration. They are the following:
1. Common culture, religion, mentality and history;
2. Understanding the role of integration by peoples and the national elites;
3. Common strategic purposes (market economy, democracy, the secular state);
4. Prospective economic dividends from the global economic projects (in particular, construction of new and sharing of available transit highways and the objects of infrastructure);
5. Serious fears about the common threats.
Following the preconditions for regional integration, at present time development of new viable model is the main task. Integration has not worked in the past, because of too wide agreements were suggested as a basis. And now we need to elaborate and accept a new model based on the following top points:
- Cooperation on top issues (water, energy, environment, etc.);
- Development of new forms of cross-border cooperation between regions and areas; elimination of the government monopoly on initiation and realization of integration projects;
- Establishing of bilateral and multilateral agreements.
So, dear participants of the forum, let me invite you to express your view on the reasons that cause obstacles on the way of integration and contribute your suggestions on facilitating the process of integration in Central Asia. The discussion will continue through month and a half, and the basic conclusions and recommendations will be formulated basing on the summary of the discussion results. |
comment['user_name']
|
Sham Bathija, Visiting Fellow
International Security Program
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
Kennedy School of Government
79 John F. Kennedy Street
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138
Telephone: (617) 495-8898
Fax: (617) 495-0606
Email: sham_bathija@harvard.edu
--------------------------------------------------------
Currently as Fellow
Sham Bathija
UNCTAD Coordinator for Central Asia
and its Affiliated Institutions,
UNCTAD/United Nations
1211 Geneva-10
Switzerland
sham.bathija@unctad.org
|
Nader Rastegar
|
Dear Mr. Ergashev:
I agree with you that the Issue of Integration is the most vexing one facing the Central Asian Nations.
I am not convinced that any one - or any one set of - simple factor(s) may be presented. I feel Central Asian Nations have become too dependent and in some ways have subordinated their meaningful sovreignity to the outside Powers which are far removed from their geographical proximity.
I specifically mention the manner in which many have acquiesed to the United States either directly or via the vassal Republic of Turkey.
Turkey is looking to the West - to Europe. Yet it has maintained a very meddlesome presence in the Region under the seemingly benign Turkic Heritage. Yet in effect, Turkey is doing the United States bidding to assure the Region remain disunited and splintered.
The most important building block of Integration is a common unity amongst all participants. There needs to be much visionary leadership, foresight, and patience. The United States presence under the guise of War on Terror intertwined by Turkey's constant incitement to extremism and hate mongering will dwarf all attempts and measures.
Thank you.
Nader Rastegar |
Bakhrom Ilhomov
ðåçþìå
|
ïêóïêóêïóï |
Peter Brimble
|
Dear colleagues,
I am very interested in the role of the business community in regional cooperation. In other regional groupings, business participation has been an important contributer to success.
I am wondering whether any participants in the Forum would have any ideas on the readiness of the Central Asian business community to play a greater role in the Central Asian economic cooperation process - either by feeding into the initiatives being supported by the ADB and other donors, or by participating directly in projects that have a regional element to them.
And also which are the institutions representing the business community that could be partners in this process?
Warm regards,
Peter Brimble |
Mr. Credo
|
Dear colleagues,
This e-discussion is very interesting. But I am not sure that integration issues are actual on the post sovies Central Asia area.
Common culture, religion, mentality and history cannot integrate this region.
Maybe some strategis issues like security and political, economic stability could promote Central Asian integration and cooperation. |
Gulden Clapsky
|
The first reaction to the disintegration of the USSR by the end of 1991 was fear of an outburst of ethnic and interstate conflicts in the post-Soviet territory.
In early 1992, a Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was created comprising almost all of the former Soviet republics, except Georgia and Azerbaijan. From the start the Commonwealth was a rather amorphous formation and was soon regarded by all parties as only a mechanism for peaceful divorce. In that regard, the CIS was certainly a success, but as soon as the danger of escalation of ethnic and interstate conflicts had passed, CIS members began to struggle and align on the basis of interests, particularly regional.
In the wake of disappointment with the CIS and concern that it might turn into a means for restoring the USSR, the Central Asian Union was created in 1994, originally comprised of three states--Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. Two other Central Asian countries--Turkmenistan and Tajikistan--did not join for various reasons. The former had declared itself neutral and refused to join any unions, although it had become part of the CIS. As for Tajikistan, to a certain extent the Central Asian Union was actually created in response to developments in that country.
In summer 1994, Kyrgyzstan President Askar Akaev admitted that Tajikistan was the source of three perils: Islamic fundamentalism infiltrating the Ferghana Valley; drug trafficking originating in Afghanistan with a transit route through Tajikistan-not without active facilitation from the armed forces of the United Tajik Opposition; and the problem of ten thousand Tajik refugees settled in Kyrgyzstan.
The creation of the Union caused a certain euphoria about the prospects of regional integration, and a number of regional cooperation institutions and mechanisms were established, such as interstate presidential and prime minister-level committees, and the Central Asian Bank for Cooperation and Development. Also, at that time, relationships among the presidents could be termed friendly.
The European Union and other Western countries keenly supported the idea of the Central Asian Union, promising financial infusions.
At present, the Union could be considered a failure in most of its functions. There are two plausible causes for the failure. The first was the narrow-minded egotism of the governments and national bureaucracies that, as it turned out, were ready to take, not to give, and at moments of crisis sought to resolve their domestic problems at the cost of their neighbors. The second reason was an active opposition to the Union from Russia, which saw in it a threat to the influence and hegemony to which it was aspiring increasingly from year to year. |
Nadejda Z.
|
Deepening of integrative processes in Central Asian region is an objective necessity.
Regional integration is a symbol of the turn of the century: EU, ASEAN, NAFTA and other international structures are not merely a gigantic something in the worldwide political process. They stimulate others to a quest for integration models so that, at least, not to lag behind political and economic developments elsewhere in the world.
Today, the systemic structure of international relations rests on regional integration, a dialog between civilizations, and globalization. Collective actions of definite modalities are a conceptual and practical challenge to all countries. It is especially obvious in Central Asia where the states have recently celebrated the first years of their independence.
We need to develop strategy of economic cooperation and closeness of economic models. In view of this I think that economic or social field may stimulate further integration. We need to deside how can common interests be united without undue interference in the national sovereignties of each member. |
Patrik
|
Dear colleagues,
Each of the Central Asian states perceives national security threats from other states in the region. Kazakhstan fears the threat of militant Islam and terrorism from Tajikistan. Kazakhstan is also currently engaged in a rather bitter border dispute with Uzbekistan. In a similar vein, Tajikistan claims that Uzbekistan is abusing its geography for political purposes to prevent progress in the Tajikistan peace process and is manipulating its power as a supplier of natural gas. Kyrgyzstan is furious about the incursion of Tajik rebels who took four Japanese hostages last Fall. The hostage crisis was a glaring demonstration of the weakness of Kyrgyzstan’s armed forces. These security threats have led the Central Asian states to place greater restrictions on cross-border relations thus hindering Central Asian integration and economic development.
Central Asian integration has severely declined as Central Asian leaders have placed barriers to regional cross-border interactions citing perceived national security threats. This trend will continue unless the Central Asia leadership will seriously work toward ensuring regional security through co-operation instead of confrontation. It is only when Central Asia’s regional security unfolds that the region’s population will experience economic opportunity. |
Nadeem Khan
|
Dear Colleagues,
It is really very exciting to read the earlier posts. In my opinion, in the present global scenario, co-operation of Central Asian countries can contribute as a united block for economic growth, however there are lots of constraints that need to be addressed at political level and then at regional level. One of the dilemmas we face in Central Asian, South Asian and similar other forums, is perhaps the lack of long lasting measures for inter-regional cooperation.
I am interested to add just one more point in the previous posts regarding integration of common knowledge in the Central Asian region. For instance, much of the research reported in UK universities has UK, US and slightly European focus. On the other hand, the findings of research reported from Asian/ African continents are donor funded researches and projects serving specific purpose of information about the conditions of those countries. What I am trying to say is that there is a need to develop research based collaboration amongst Central Asian countries through inter-university collaborations. May be such collaborations would provide more detailed picture of common problems and issues in a different way, and as a result, huge resources could be re-allocated within the region.
I agree to the posts confirming diversity in terms of religion, culture and similar areas, however, there are similarities and common problems in neighbouring countries and for that lessons could be learnt from regional collaborations.
Nadeem Khan
|
Bakhtiyor Ergashev
|
Dear Forum participants,
I am pleased to announce that the mid-term results summary on the e-discussion on the following issue: “What are the prospects of the Central Asian countries integration?” has been distributed among all forum participants and Central Asian Gateway Regional Portal users on December 15, 2004.
If you would like to receive a copy of the mid-term results summary of this e-discussion, please, send a message to cagateway@cer.uz.
Further contributions are welcome!
We look forward to all of your contributions! |
Mirek Karasek
ðåçþìå
|
I would not comment on the specific political issues – artificially activated xenophobia that is deemed to keep the republics’ societies politically stable is well understood – only in so far that they keep the standard of living of the peoples in Central Asia from dramatic improvement.
What I would like to briefly comment on is how the Central Asia’s (henceforth “The Region”) BENELUX-type (BT) integration is the only way to save the Region before the political and socio-economic abyss.
Note: BENELUX-type (BT) integration means the regional block (of originally: Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxembourg) that abolished customs duties, tariffs, NTBs, and made the highest principles of legal, regulatory and institutional importance (the first was the business legal systems) uniform among the three (politically absolute independent) members.
To keep my discussion brief, I would just mention individual salient points that I consider crucial for the better future of the Region. For some more detailed discussion I am appending two annexes containing excerpts from my various Reports to Brussels’ EC head-quarters (they date between 2002-2003):
1. There have clearly been always two interacting causal chains at play in every society throughout the history of the world:
< economic crisis --> < socio-political crisis, and
< social heterogeneity --> < socio-political crisis --> < economic crisis.
The combination of these chains then forms a vicious circle of a fast deterioration of the whole society. Both chains work on the reverse principle too, when substituting increase sign (by decrease sign). It means that if a smart oligarch , monarch or government creates higher living standard and better social “safety net“ and services then the social heterogeneity radically diminishes and with it a chance for socio-political crises, upheavals etc. This is apparently the goal of all goverments. The problem is how to create higher living standard. The next points show “how“ to do it, but only in the BT-integrated Region.
2. The Region, although strategically always important , has acquired incredible economic importance as the “market pipeline” Europe ↔ China (Far East), eventually Europe ↔ Indian subcontinent . At least the same importance as the oil pipeline. For discussion see ANNEX 1 and ANNEX 2 (with, both, Russia and EU realizing the same importance).
3. As the BT integrated Region’s republics (with unified regulatory and institutional transportation principles and abolished customs, NTBs , etc.) will make the transit through the Region as pain-less as in the EU , the money earned from transit alone – just by allowing free-flow of products through ; Region itself does not have to export anything at all – might reach at least 10% to 15% of the Region’s current total GDP.
4. The Region’s export products (cotton, agriculture products, minerals, oil, natural gas, downstream & chemicals, gold, and other raw materials, etc.) will get in on the international “market pipeline” and will generate another extra-profit, and thus GDP increase, because of the rapidity of their move to customers. For details see ANNEX 1 (see 7% increase of international trade → 1% increase of GDP)
5. In case of the WTO accession, the Region will have much better position to negotiate as a block, rather than individual states with vastly disjunctive economic strategies.
6. This is probably second the most important (if not the most important) point. With international tourism earning tourist-destinations anything from 5% to 80% of the destination country’s GDP, the Silk Route (e.g. Buchara , Samarkand and all the rest of the historical sites ) is the Region everybody has been wanting to visit , though never could. And yet, as it is argued in ANNEX 1, no extraordinary expenditures are needed. At least not in the beginning.
7. The spin-off SMEs from both, transport and tourism, would make full (and well-paid) employment feasible and the fiscal result would make the Region the envy of all the former COMECON states.
Summary is quite clear. While PROSPECTS are dependent on various exogenous factors –EU (EC respectively), Russian government, Elites and Media in individual societies, willingness of the individual governments to be swayed by economic (and social) arguments (it works in Kazakhstan), etc. – NECESSITY of Central Asian countries’ integration is virtually a question of LIFE or DEATH of those societies and their meaningful future.
ANNEX 1 :
“………INTERNATIONAL TRADE
…..It has been explained that the necessity of trade in and through the Central Asian Region has been established clearly not just by the need for the current economic improvement but by the history as well. An economic axiom says that that countries with strong international trade have been able to generate higher standard of living (as measured in percentage increase of the GNP per capita). Most statistical analyses show that, roughly, every 7% to 9% increase in the international trade causes increase of the REAL GDP by 1% in any one “Silk Route” country 1). Increase of Gross Domestic Product then represents a historical strive of every society for self-preservation. It is also known that the necessary condition for an international trade has always been an effective and efficient long-haul traffic. This makes the railway traffic, particularly along and beyond the Silk Route, extremely important for the economies of Central Asian republics and for wellbeing of their peoples …….
…….In so far the macro-economic needs assessment two major demand generators for international transport stand out: (1) China has become a full member of WTO in 2002 and, as a consequence, will have to substantially slash import tariffs and quotas; (2) China and South-East Asia are still showing 7% - 8% annual economic (not to mention enormous migration-to-cities in China at a rate of 20 million people per year) growth. Thus, the request for hugely increased import of industrial and consumer goods (cars , computers & consumers electronics, oil-refined products, wheat, fruits etc.), based on enormously populous part of the world , will put a colossal capacity requirements on the intercontinental railway transport 6) ,7) , 8). Here, it should be added that the regional trade is the most dynamic element of Asian growth right now. In the first half of 2002, exports of eight East Asian economies to China grew by 50 percent, while exports to the US and Japan were flat or declining 11) …….
……..At this point of the future – with exception of the Trans-Siberian Railroad – the answer to this huge inter-continental transportation demand must only lie in the Central Asian railways system and its throughput capacity. At that point this railways system will have – if the flow through it will be unimpeded by any technical, procedural or political incompatibilities – the same strategic importance as the oil pipeline. This should assure its financial viability…… .
…….It should be stressed that all the five states serve as transit countries for each other. It was always necessary to avoid customs and other barriers to free movement of transit and transport among them. Some problems with CIS lead the search for the alternative routes, especially from East Asia to Western Europe due to new rail linkage built in recent years (between China and Kazakhstan, 1992 and Turkmenistan and Iran, 1996). These links cross now the Region and are opening real chance for rebirth of famous Silk Road 10). Providing for inter-modal connections between the Uzbek and Chinese rail systems across the Kyrgyz Republic would reduce the cost of shipping goods to South or East Asia from Central Asia and vice versa 15). Economic growth of the Central Asian Republics (CARs) depends largely on developing new trading relations within the region and new trading partners and transport links to markets in industrialized countries. One of the potential trading partner is Xinjiang in the Chinese western region, that has extensive cultural affinities with the CARs. Even more important, however, are the potential resources and market complementarities. Currently, primary commodities (including hides and skins, cotton, petroleum, and steel) flow from the CARs to China , and labour-intensive light industrial goods ( shoes , garments , textiles , and processed foos and beverages) flow in the reverse direction. As industrial and service sector development takes place, the mix of commodities traded can be expected to grow more complex and inter-country trade could show increased flows of higher value-added goods and services. The Chinese economy has grown by more than 10 percent each year and development in Xinjiang was particularly rapid , based on extensive development of mineral resources and widening of the agricultural and industrial base. (Most recently Premier Zhu Rongji has proposed to expand investment in the western regions of China, including Xinjiang, in 10th Five Year Plan 2001–2005) 16) …….
…….There are now seven different but traditional routes through the Russian Federation and four alternative existing or prospective rail routes through other neighbouring countries:
a) via the trans-Caspian ferry through Azerbaijan to the port of Poti, Georgia, on the Black Sea ;
b) via the new rail to a port in China
c) via new route via Iran to the port of Istanbul, Turkey, and
d) via the new route through Iran to the port of Bandar Abbas.
It is obvious that no growth of Central Asia’s trade is possible without proper, INTEGRATED transit transportation alternative.
Given the present prevailing direction towards Western Europe, the most direct and cost-effective alternative routes is the one, which passed through trans-Caspian Caucasian states . It is the shortest one and could be put into operation even on the basis of existing – and, later on, upgraded to European standards – transport regulations, technical standards and administrative practices. ……
……It should reduce the cost of freight from Tashkent to the Black Sea by 30–35% compared with traditional route. A new ferry line linking Geogian port Poti with the Ukraininan port Ilichevsk and the Bulgarian port of Varna should assure that Central Asians can export to Europe via Bulgaria and the Danube 10).
On the other side, the search for comparative advantage lead the Central Asia to increase substantially links with East Asia. A railway extension linking Kazakhstan to China, and land bridge (both road and rail) project Andijon (Uzbekistan) – Osh (Kyrgyzstan) – Kashgar (China) are important items on this itinerary for Central Asian republics….to achieve fast, reliable and inexpensive alternative transit transport routes is vitally important. Also, a new alternative links with Western Europe and East Asia are opening the new prospects for its trade in the short- and long-term with the largest trading countries in Eurasian Continent. The time required for sending goods from Lianyungang in China to Istanbul is reduced by 25-30 per cent compared with the sea route through Suez Canal and Mediterranean Sea 10).
……….INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL AND TOURISM
The revenues, job creation and, hence, an important increase of social security (which is one of the main goal of Central Asian governments) from international tourism are, potentially, enormous. Tourism accounts for more than a sixth of the 49 least developed countries’ non-petroleum exports, far surpassing their second and third largest export earners (raw cotton and textiles). It has become one of the main components of these countries’ GDP, or, in some cases, the largest one. As the percentage of “international travel & tourism sector” in individual developing countries on the country’s GDP varies from 5% to 80% 12) it is difficult to assess precisely the total benefit portion of this issue to individual East Asian country . But even in the case of poorest country Tajikistan , with the GDP figure around USD 2 billion, only 1% increase amounts to the total benefits of USD 20 million ……
…..In the case of Uzbekistan, when only 10% of the potential available resources was used , the tourism revenue were USD 7.3 mill 13) (which was 0.2% - two tenths of one percent – of the Uzbekistan EXPORT in that year). Only marginally better use of these resources – and railway telecommunication and public telecom should be just the right instruments for better use of tourism resources – say 40% instead of 10% will bring USD 29 mill; while mere 1% of the Uzbekistan GDP (in 2001) should be around USD 60 - 100 mill. Thus we can safely conclude that the extra benefits from international travel & tourism in Uzbekistan can, with only operational and managerial improvements due to railway telecommunication systems upgrades, be easily within the interval <USD 29 mill, USD 100 mill> …….
…….It is frequently claimed that demand for tourism infrastructure, for instance in Uzbekistan, needs at least USD 560 mill 13). Also, according to the same source, the implementation of the “Great Silk Route” Project , among others, should: (a) to embrace available historical, architectural and cultural places of interest, and (b) to create conditions for increasing the period of stay of foreign tourists in the country from 3–4 to 7–10 days. ……
…….Now, those are exactly the issues the special trains, say, “Silk Route Expresses” with sleeping accommodation and stops in all the “cultural places of interest” (Bukhara , Samarkand, Khiva, Tashkent, Fergana Valley, Almaty, etc.) would completely embrace with only the fraction of the USD 560 millions going into railways’ tourism projects that already have their own infrastructure , based on improved telecommunications and operational systems…..
ANNEX 2 :
…… PROBLEM WITH STRATEGIC OUTLOOK IN THE REGIONAL REPUBLICS
REGIONAL STRATEGY vs. INDIVIDUAL REPUBLICS’ STRATEGY
……The strategic importance of the Region is in mass railway transit of freight between EUROPE and CHINA (and other Far East destination), which in 5 to 10 years will make or broke the economies of the Central Asia ( and European exporters as well). The regional and international transit to be efficient needs not only advanced and technically and technologically compatible (perhaps even “unified”) telecommunication and signalling – but also operational & procedural – systems. ….
……..There is, at this moment, institutionally but, above all, politically motivated unwillingness in all the republics to work together. In fact, the border closing between individual CARs is becoming commonplace and even the business travel between them has become a nightmare lately……. .
…….While trying to avoid each others border-crossing in railway freight transport , it has become apparent that the only country that could “go it alone” is Kazakhstan with its two main “strategic priority corridor. …Moreover, Kazakhstan can, and already has been, shopping for lowest interest rates among any number of American, Japanese and other countries’ banks. Oil fields, pipe-line and smooth through-one-state-only transit corridors (Europe-Russia-China eventually Europe–Azerbaijan, Georgia–China) will help to open a lot of doors there.
…..However, the same “one-state-only” principle is seen in Uzbekistan railways too. Instead of, by TRACECA envisaged, corridor: Tashkent – Samarkand – Bukhara – Turkmenabad – and along the Amudarya River (criss-crossing between Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan) to Dashkhavuz - Beynau and Aktau, the UTY’s new strategic priority is to avoid Turkmenistan by going from Samarkand via Navoi – Uchkuduk – Nukus – and, finally, to Beynau and Aktau……... It is where humanitarian aid (first) and the international trade products can reach Afghanistan’s railway system once it is built, hopefully in the in the near future, and connected with Pakistan, Indian sub-continent and sea ports in the Indian Ocean. ……
……RUSSIAN REGIONAL STRATEGY vs. EUROPEAN REGIONAL STRATEGY
….There are...... two separate interested parties-cum-donors: (1) The European Commission (that started TRACECA, TACIS and CART Programmes….. and (2) the Russia (via Russian Railways Special Projects Institutes in Moscow )…… sees the situation in this very light and thus…… have been pursuing – and quite successfully too – the very same route…….
……As TRACECA and CART projects need political will (from all 5 governments in Central Asia) to successfully implement their projects: which is to make freight transit EUROPA – CHINA (Far East , India etc. ) economically viable, i.e. faster and cheaper than sea routes. Technologically it is without any problem, however, politically it is, at present, insurmountable……
…..Russia …. is far better equipped to, if necessary, forced the institutional co-operation of Central Asian railways. It is not just because the whole Central Asian railways’ system was, up until 1991 (i.e. under the USSR), centrally managed from the Moscow but because the Region’s railway systems have been for decades (perhaps even a century) a domain of ethnic Russians everywhere in the Central Asia. ……
……Now, the European Union’s strategy has been, as we mentioned above, virtually the same with one, perhaps important, difference. The TRACECA corridors assume the China – Europe rail freight traffic to follow the shortest route from Druzhba ( on the Kazakhstan-China border) via Tashkent, Bukhara, Turkmenabad and on towards Beynau and Actau and cross the Caspian Sea to Baku. From there either down to Turkey and (eventually) Istanbul or through Georgia to Poti (or Batumi) and via the Danube River to the Central and eventually even Northern Europe. Thus, the important difference here is not to go…….. through Russian railways on the way to China and Far East. …..
LITERATURE :
[1985] Karasek, M., The Anatomy of Decision, (hardcover), Vantage Press Inc., New York 1985, 200 pages
[1998] -“-, "With Adam Smith against the decay of societies", Polygon , 8 , Polygon Verlag , Zurich, 1998, pp.60-64
[2000-2004] -“-, Risk of Conflicts In and Between Heterogeneous Societies, manuscript (cca 75,000 words) prepared for Soros Institute (OSI), IISS ( U.K. ), TACIS, and EuropeAid , 2004
[2002] -“-, “Synopsis of the Progress Report”, 2002 TACIS Services, European Commission, Brussels, 2002 (English & Russian version ) pp.16
[2002] -“-, CART – Progress Report, 2002 TACIS Services, European Commission, September 2002, Brussels, pp.62 + Annexes pp. 150
[2003] -“-, CART- Project Completion Report, TACIS Services, European Commission, Brussels, May 2003 , pp.170 |
Bakhtiyor Ergashev
|
Dear colleagues!
Today we are pleased to announce summary on the e-discussion "What are the prospects of the Central Asian countries integration?". In my opinion our discussion has been flourish and successful; thanks to all interested in that query. I would like to thank everyone, who took a part in that e-discussion.
Taking into consideration opinion of the forum participants, we can make several conclusions:
First: All forum participants agree with the viewpoint that the regional integration in Central Asia (CA) could become the locomotive of socio-economic development of the countries of the region. The integration is able to solve majority of challenges and problems of the countries of Central Asia.
Second: Majority of participants of the forum agrees that there are economic and cultural-historical bases for regional integration, but absence of political efforts from the outside of the countries of the region makes the process of integration in Central Asia slow and inefficient.
Meanwhile, it is difficult to agree with opinion of Ms. S.Arifjanova on the following: "Underlying reason of any political decision is the economic pragmatism. And as far as the forces interested in acceptance of this decision are significant, orientation of political actions are also determined. I.e. economic stimulus to integration are most essential".
Integration of the Central Asian states might be more successful if it will be based on economic stimulus. Currently, in present conditions, anti-integration efforts of the majority of political elites became the main obstacle on the way of regional integration. It clear that without development of uniform political platform the process of integration as usual will lead to lack of success.
We are completely agreed with the opinion of Mr. S. Serikbay on the issue that one of the main reasons of collapse of integration processes in Central Asia is incompleteness of the process of state formation in the countries of the region. He wrote: "The countries of the region have not passed the process of self-identification yet. The process of fragmentation started from national and territorial delimitation in 20th years of XX century is not completed yet as well. Suggested idea of regional integration in such conditions is very difficult".
In particular this factor forces political elites of the countries to failure the processes of deep integration in order to put obstacles in the way of truncation of the national sovereignty. It could be named as "inferiority complex of the postcolonial countries".
Besides this, to be more specific on discussion of the processes of regional integration, we would not accent on the issue which country is more or less guilty in failure of Central Asian integration and which country pursues an isolationist policy. It is deep and complicated question "who is the isolationist and who is not the isolationist"; and it is not correctly from the point of view of science and ethic to discuss this issue.
The purpose of our discussion aimed to analyze the problems and challenges and search the real ways, mechanisms and tools to develop integration in the region. Regional cooperation in Central Asia was mainly limited by joint consultations and applications on the issues of mutual interest, the "necessarily" of trade and economic relations, separate interstate projects and programs.
Summarizing all statements of participants, it is possible to suppose, that there are a number of reasons, continuing to render negative influence to the processes of regional integration and cooperation:
1. Political leaders of the countries were not inclined to recognize the importance over national structures for development of integration. The aggravated sensation of the national sovereignty does not allow developing of vision of regional co-operation as a situation which is advantageous for all parties;
2. The countries of the region continue to pursue the purposes of maintenance national self-sufficiency in strategic products and services;
3. There is a presence of uncertainty in distribution of incomes from regional projects and fear of possible losses (both economic, and political);
4. The fear of the small countries of larger neighbors, and also a competition for leadership in region which is frequently urged on by the policy of the next large powers directed against active involving of the countries of the Central Asia in regional cooperation and integration;
5. Divergences in economic policy and in economic parameters of the countries of region which continues to amplify;
6. Still rather weak institutional and administrative opportunities of the national governments, and also necessity to give more attention to questions of internal character (in particular in the first years after finding independence).
Talking on the regional integration in Central Asia it is necessary to note such factor as growth of influence of religious extremism and terrorism in the countries of region. It sounds paradoxical, but religious extremists are interested in regional integration much more, than many groups of elites and population. That is because in conditions of the incorporated region, with the general boarders, they will receive much more opportunities for their activity.
But, unfortunately, in our e-discussion the problem of influence of the extremism and terrorism to the integration processes in the region was not considered. And problems that are left beyond the attention of the participants do exist.
Summarizing our discussion, it is necessary to note that one of the major factors of success of integration is development of mechanisms of indemnification of losses to the countries in connection with participation in regional projects. Regional projects should bring to each country more, than the efforts and resources spent by it, and any losses of the country - should be adequately compensated. Thus the mechanism of distribution of expenses and profits should be clear and transparent for the involved parties in order to prevent growth of mistrust between the countries of region. Opportunities and contribution of each involved country should be fairly evaluated financially, politically and from the other points of view. It is necessary the deep qualitative and quantitative estimation of initiatives, an estimation of their political expediency and advantage for the various countries that are especially important for realization of long-term projects in the field of a regional infrastructure, where it is extremely important also to have vision of prospects and profits.
And that is a major condition of success of integration efforts in Central Asia.
Our e-discussion on the prospects of regional integration in Central Asia is now closed. But we are look forward to continue our dialogue on other forthcoming forums on related issues.
Thanks a lot to all of you!
Sincerely,
Forum Moderator
Bakhtiyor Ergashev. |
Mered Batyrov
|
Even though the esteemed Moderator, called the discussion to end, I just wanted to add few words on an optimistic note in regard to regional cooperation in Central Asia.
I think that in the most recent we finally saw a welcoming increase in Central Asian economic cooperation. This is being witnessed by the numerous reports about ongoing and growing cross-border economic activity between Shimkent & Tashkent regions of Kazakstan and Uzbekistan, Dashoguz and Horezm regions of Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, without even mentioning cross-border Kazak-Kyrgyz border. We all know the driving forces behind the surge in such trade and the governments' responses to it, but let me leave those issues beyond the discussion for a moment. I think it is wonderful that after years of suspension our compatriots clearly see comparative economic advantages of various localities, price disparities, etc. and, all the difficultis of the day notwithstanding, try to exploit the opportunities provided.
The point I am trying to make is that this is going to be a long term trend, which, in the end, will trump the empty promises of official declarations and efforts to compartmentalize the region. The challenge is how to capitalize on that trend, how to help those economic agents not to get totally discouraged and, in a mid-term perspective, make the process more orderly and widespread. Thank you. |
Fromdushanbe
|
Just look at that! A new monetary unit has appeared in exchange offices in Bagram (Afghanistan) and in Dushanbe (Tajikistan). I mean Euromoney with portrait of Belgian capital. As became known from one of maintenance officer in Dushanbe's airport, Belgian military carried out an inspection of airfield maintenance facilities with a view to their use for assembling of Belgian F-16 aircraft, which are to be delivered here by military transport with the aim of their further aerial redeployment in US airbase in Bagram, located 27 miles north of Kabul.
5 French fighters Mirage have been already deployed on flying line of this airport. And in the short run they will be relocated in Afghanistan, too.
If you think that such actions are related with promoting activity of bin Laden in Afghanistan, you are wrong. In reality they are requisite for holding "democratic election" to the parliament of Afghanistan.
To all seeming it'll be necessary for on-line delivery of voting papers to long-distance kishlaks. |
Fromdushanbe
|
Just look at that! A new monetary unit has appeared in exchange offices in Bagram (Afghanistan) and in Dushanbe (Tajikistan). I mean Euromoney with portrait of Belgian capital. As became known from one of maintenance officer in Dushanbe's airport, Belgian military carried out an inspection of airfield maintenance facilities with a view to their use for assembling of Belgian F-16 aircraft, which are to be delivered here by military transport with the aim of their further aerial redeployment in US airbase in Bagram, located 27 miles north of Kabul.
5 French fighters Mirage have been already deployed on flying line of this airport. And in the short run they will be relocated in Afghanistan, too.
If you think that such actions are related with promoting activity of bin Laden in Afghanistan, you are wrong. In reality they are requisite for holding "democratic election" to the parliament of Afghanistan.
To all seeming it'll be necessary for on-line delivery of voting papers to long-distance kishlaks. |
.gif){kind=logo}
