The End of Eurasia: Russia Between Geopolitics and Globalization - Geopolitical Analysis Book for International Relations & Global Economy Studies

According to Mr. Trenin the end of Eurasia can be a good thing if the Russians will manage to abandon the idea quickly. Eurasia in this context is not a geographical term, but a mental construct, the idea of uniqueness of Russia and her separate (from the Western civilization) identity and destiny. Russia has a distinctive feature of having more land in Asia than in Europe, which undeniably has had a huge impact on Russian life since 17 century. But from the author's point of view the idea of Eurasia would be foolish pursue since Russia is facing a whole new set of challenges.The author argues that the collapse of Soviet Union was de facto the end of the idea of Eurasia. With the final end of the Russian Empire (and its short-lived successor - the Soviet Union) myth of Eurasia must also be abandoned. This is the right time for the Russian people to shed this idea once and for all and to join the European civilization where the Russian roots are. A Europe that includes Bulgaria and Turkey cannot close its doors to Russia - at least not on cultural grounds, Mr. Trenin emphasizes. I would also add that, while the concept of Eurasia was first developed by the 19-th century Russian Slavophile, these days it is completely turned around and used by the Western either far-right or far-left circles just to argue how barbaric and "Asiatic" Russia is and always will be. May be if the Russians discard Eurasia myth, the Western academics and policy-makers will finally give up using Marquis de Custine's book written in 1839 as the ultimate source of knowledge about Russia!The author notes that the most important thing for a state has always been the sense of identity stemming from clear realization of its geographical limits - borders. In tsarist Russia and then in Soviet Union this idea was basically absent. Russia has emerged as an imperial-minded state, conqueror of the ever-moving frontiers. The frontiers had been shifting from the Urals to the Pacific and from the Polar Circle to Afghanistan. As a result Russia has never emerged as a nation state. The human and other recourses were routinely taken by the rules and invested in the continuously expanding borderlands at the expense of Russia proper.The time of these spreading out Empires has passed. To survive in the XXI century Russia (which is significantly smaller now) needs to be integrated to the Western economic and political environment. But the part can integrate into whole only when the part is aware of its own limits. Russia needs to maintain secure borders, which connect rather than separate countries. Only then the true integration is possible. Russia can recreate itself only through its successful relationship with the West. It will have - the author argues - to recognize that its place in Europe will rest on its ability to integrate, not on its political-military influence beyond its borders.The author correctly argues that with NATO quickly expanding Russia faces the prospect of progressive marginalization. This prospect can be stopped only by a conscious Russian decision in favor of Europe. The Eurasia myth must be buried. In the same time Mr. Trenin is aware that there are Western high-profiled advocates of dismantling of the Russian state (for example, Mr. Zbignev Brzezinski has offered three loosely confederated Russian States). Or rather there are some people in the West who "love" Russia so much that they prefer to see several of them.The other point, which Mr. Trenin is not making but it is implicit, is that Russia cannot any longer play the role of " the Great Satan" for the West. Mr. Churchill and Mr. Truman (I would argue) successfully prodded Stalin on this role. The Soviet Union so dutifully (and foolishly) played "The Evil Empire" for 40 years. Russia simply can't afford anything like this - catastrophic population decline (Russia has approximately the same population as Pakistan) and underdeveloped economy are more important than anything else. Of course, with stunning $300+ billion budget the American military has to have some enemy. Russia is fortunate that the West is looking for it elsewhere. It would be wise if Russia continues to refrain from assuming the role of the Western antagonist and refuse any attempt by the "friends" inside and outside to drag her into that unrewarding role (over Chechnya, NATO, etc).This is a well-researched book from a very insightful observer. Mr. Trenin is retired Russian army officer who participated in arms control negotiations. He is now with the Carnegie Endowment for International peace in Moscow. I disagree with the author on some minor points (also he can be perceived as someone who idealizes the West a little too much), but totally agree with his main lines of thought. What adds weight to this book is the fact that Russia under Putin's leadership seems to be moving (slowly but steadily) to the same direction as the author suggests. I recommend this book to everyone interested in Russian affairs.A nice look into the geo-politics of Central Asia and the former Soviet Republics. And older book but still can relate to it in today's world.