Concept of ‘Eurasia’ much more viable than ‘Europe’

(MENAFN)
The concept of a unified Eurasian space is proving more practical than the idea of an isolated Europe. While total separation from Western Europe is neither feasible nor desirable for Eurasian countries, the real challenge lies in managing the unavoidable influence of external powers—primarily NATO nations—without letting them create internal divisions.

Despite increasing collaboration between Russia and its southern and eastern partners, the economic and technological strengths of the U.S. and EU remain influential. History shows that self-contained regional alliances succeed only when there is either complete external opposition or a dominant power willing to lead and bear the costs. Neither condition exists in Greater Eurasia.

Eurasian nations have no interest in leaving the global economy, nor is any single state willing to dominate the region at its own expense. The aim is not to form a closed bloc but to build a cooperative framework that remains engaged with the wider world. Even amid political tensions, countries like the U.S., EU members, and some Middle Eastern nations continue to offer valuable trade, markets, and technology.

While some portray the EU as a model of insulated cooperation—referencing a metaphor of a "garden"—its integration has always depended on openness to the U.S. and China. The EU has only partially excluded Russia and the Global South, and even those efforts are incomplete and mostly symbolic.

The West's attempts to build legal and institutional barriers around itself are fragile and repeatedly challenged by global realities. In contrast, the marginalization of Russia and its allies has prompted new discussions about creating a more inclusive and open Eurasian framework.

Could Eurasia evolve into a self-sufficient development region? In theory, yes. But unlike post-WWII Europe, Eurasia lacks a clear leader to drive such integration. The U.S. once took on this global role but now shows signs of retreating, as its voters favor reducing foreign commitments.

China, despite its economic power, is unlikely to lead Eurasia due to its non-interventionist political culture and the massive responsibility such a role would entail. Similarly, Russia, China, and India—each powerful in its own right—have no interest in competing for continental dominance.

Instead, organizations like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) thrive on mutual respect and equality. Their success reflects a different model of regional cooperation—one without a hegemon, built on partnership rather than power.

MENAFN26052025000045015687ID1109594471