Economy of Ukraine
Published since September 1958
Login

№ 3/2020

Ekon Ukr. 2020 (3): 26–41
https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2020.03.026

INFLUENCE OF G7 AND G20 COUNTRIES ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF WORLD ECONOMY

УДК 327:339.923] ((4) + (5?11))

JEL:

PILIAIEV Igor1

1Institute for Economics and Forecasting of NAS of Ukraine, Research ID : http://www.researcherid.com/rid/https://publons.com/researcher/3420250/igor-piliaiev
OrcID ID : https://orcid.org/https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7509-3158


THE EURASIAN STRATEGIC CRISIS TRIANGLE: CHALLENGES FOR UKRAINE AND THE WEST


The purpose of the article is to investigate the modern phenomenon of strategic value triangle on the Eurasian megacontinent with tops-epicenters in Ukraine, the Korean peninsula and around Taiwan. Applying the methodological tools of post-non-classical synergetics, the theory of political realism, constructivism, civilization and political-transformational theory, the concept of strategic value crisis and the current strategic-crisis configuration in Eurasia is defined in the context of modern globalization processes. The nature of the ongoing crisis around Ukraine and its key implications for the transformation of the G7’s global leadership, for the Eurasian megacontinent in general and Eastern Asia in particular are analyzed. It is proved that the Ukrainian crisis is a key strategic crisis not only in the post-Soviet space but also in the Eurasian continent as a whole. Thus, in terms of the involvement of major actors in world and continental politics, it is comparable to the prolonged crises in the Korean Peninsula and around Taiwan. It is substantiated that the Russian annexation of Crimea and the ongoing armed conflict in the East of Ukraine block integration processes within both Greater Europe and Continental Eurasia, in particular, between its two most economically and socially developed and dynamic macro-regions –– East Asia and the EU. At the same time, with regard to Russia, one may observe the growing risk of its final “turn to the East” and, accordingly, of establishing a strictly authoritarian geostrategic and military-political alliance between the Russian Federation and China. The ways of resolving the outlined strategic crises are proposed through overcoming the traditional East-West cultural and value paradigm, inclusive dialogue, harmonization of different regulatory orders with the participation of key actors of the megacontinental policy, enhancing interaction between European, Eurasian and Eurasian-Pacific institutions (formats) of cooperation and integration.


Keywords:strategic crisis; values; Eurasia; East-West dichotomy; armed conflict in the East of Ukraine

Article original in Ukrainian (pp. 26 - 41) DownloadDownloads :58
The article was received by the Editorial staff on February 11 , 2020

References

1. Costea (Ghimis) A.M. The Ukrainian Crisis - An Unpredictable Event? CES Working Papers, 2016, Vol. VIII, Iss. 3, pp. 333-347.

2. Menon R., Rumer E.B. Conflict in Ukraine: The Unwinding of the Post-Cold War Order. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2015.

3. Serbos S., Anastasiadis G. Revisiting Europe's Geopolitical Landscape after the Ukraine Crisis: America's Balance of Power Strategy. UNISCI Journal, 2018, Vol. 46, pp. 177-195.

4. Heyets V., Hrytsenko A. "TERTIUM DATUR" by Grzegorz W. Kolodko. Economic Theory, 2019, No. 1, pp. 5-19 [in Ukrainian].
doi.org/10.15407/etet2019.01.005

5. Huang A. Taiwan Is No Crimea, But… Seattle and Washington, The National Bureau of Asian Research, 2014, available at: www.nbr.org/publication/taiwan-is-no-crimea-but/.

6. Raina H. Implications of the Ukrainian Crisis for the Asia Pacific. Harvard International Review, April 3, 2014, available at: hir.harvard.edu/article/?a=3243.

7. Eaton G. Francis Fukuyama interview: "Socialism ought to come back". New Statesman, October 17, 2018, available at: www.newstatesman.com/culture/observations/2018/10/francis-fukuyama-interview-socialism-ought-come-back.

8. Saalman L. Little Grey Men: China and the Ukraine Crisis. Survival, December 2016 - January 2017, Vol. 58, No. 6, pp. 135-156.
doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2016.1257201

9. Reznik O., Reznik V. Ukraine's European Choice as a Social Condition of Democratic Transition. Ideology and Politics, 2017, Vol. 8, Iss. 2, pp. 117-145.

10. Mackinnon A. Counting the Dead in Europe's Forgotten War. Interview with Alexander Hug, the Deputy Head of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine. Foreign Affairs, October 25, 2018, available at: foreignpolicy.com/2018/10/25/counting-the-dead-in-europes-forgotten-war-ukraine-conflict-donbass-osce/.

11. Minakov M. Development and Dystopia. Studies in post-Soviet Ukraine and Eastern Europe. Stuttgart, ibidem-Verlag, 2018.

12. Smoor L. Understanding the Narratives Explaining the Ukrainian Crisis: Identity Divisions and Complex Diversity in Ukraine. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, European and Regional Studies, 2015, Vol. 11, Iss. 1, pp. 63-96.
doi.org/10.1515/auseur-2017-0004

13. Sudakova N. Volodymyr Paniotto: Elections, Law on Language and Tomos in One Year Can Very Much Shake the Society. Ukrainian Truth, February 4, 2019, available at: www.pravda.com.ua/articles/2019/02/4/7205638/ [in Ukrainian].

14. Yekelchyk S. The Conflict in Ukraine: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015.

15. Fritz V. State-Building: A Comparative Study of Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus and Russia. Budapest and New York, Central European University Press, 2007.

16. Haran O. Ukrainian-Russian Conflict and Its Implications for Northeast Asia. International Journal of Korean Unification Studies, 2015, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 125-158.

17. Minakov M. Post-Soviet Transit between Revolution and Restoration. Ideology and Politics, 2017, Vol. 8, Iss. 2, pp. 3-8.

18. Wilson A. Ukrainian Nationalism in the 1990s: A Minority Faith. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996.

19. Said E.W. Culture and Imperialism. New York, Vintage Books, 1994.

20. Cheskin A. Russian soft power in Ukraine: A structural perspective. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 2017, Iss. 50, pp. 277-287.
doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2017.09.001

21. Lyubchenko O. The Ukrainian Crisis: A Case of 'New Orientalism'. Acta Politologica, 2017, Vol. 9, Iss. 1, pp. 45-60.

22. Saran S. The collision of these 3 geographies is creating a new world order. World Economic Forum, November 1, 2018, available at: www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/11/eurasia-indo-pacific-arctic-new-world-order.

23. Grachikov E. Chinese partnership strategy: practice and its conceptualisation (1993-2018). World Economy and International Relations, 2019, Vol. 63, No. 3, pp. 83-93 [in Russian].
doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2019-63-3-83-93

24. Kissinger H. To settle the Ukraine crisis, start at the end. Washington Post, March 6, 2014, p. 2.

25. Zając J. Poland's Security Policy. The West, Russia, and the Changing International Order. London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.

26. Koshkina S. Andriy Yermak: "We Came to Power to Leave a Bright Mark in History. This is the Only Motivation." Left Bank, September 23, 2019, available at: lb.ua/news/2019/09/23/437977_andrey_ermak_mi_prishli_vlast.html [in Ukrainian].

27. Macron E. Discours du Président de la République à la conférence des Ambassadeurs. August 27, 2019, Élysée Palace, Paris, available at: www.elysee.fr [in French].


-->