Two Views on One Problem: The Eurasian Project and “One Belt — One Road”

The article compares the theoretical foundations of ethno-cultural policy in the Eurasian region.

Aim. The goal set by the authors is to compare two approaches in the theory of social dynamics, on the basis of which the ethno-cultural policy of the modern states of the region — Russia (USSR) and China — is based.

Tasks. Identification of fundamental differences in the geopolitical strategies developed by the theorists of Eurasianism and Chinese scientists.

Methods. In the context of the implementation of this task — a comparison of the methodological foundations of real political projects in the Eurasian space, through logical analysis, differences are established in the theories of geopolitical dynamics proposed in the Eurasian concept and in Chinese science. The method of comparative analysis of ethno-cultural and ethno-economic policies in the Eurasian region of the two most influential powers allows us to conclude that alternative theoretical concepts and their paradigmatic limitations are adequate to real geopolitical processes.

Results. The study showed that the concept of Eurasian geocivilization, which was formed as overcoming the limitations of the Slavophile version of Russian civilization in the context of the collapse of traditional approaches in social theory and in the context of historical collisions of the early twentieth century, had a positive potential, partially realized in the policy of the Soviet state. But the conceptual limitations imposed by the inadequate theoretical basis — the theory of civilizations existing at that time — did not allow the formation of a single Eurasian cultural space to be completed. The Eurasian unity represented by the Soviet Union was consolidated by institutional means, but it was not realized as a cultural synthesis. Chinese scientists have proposed an alternative project for the integration of the Eurasian space — the “One Belt — One Road”, which began to be implemented already in the XXI century. This project is based on Marxist theory and concepts of the second half of the twentieth century, complimentary to Marxism or being neo-Marxist.

Conclusions. The incompleteness and instability of the Eurasian project in the Soviet version is a consequence of the limitations inherent in the geopolitical theory itself, which does not take into account the positive potential of Marxist theory and social concepts developed in the second half of the twentieth century. Chinese scientists use the scientific potential of Eurasianism in interpreting the Russian mentality and consider the politics of modern Russia through the prism of Eurasian connotations, but Eurasianism as a geopolitical theory, in their opinion, has not passed the test of history. Therefore, Chinese policy in the Eurasian space is based on other theoretical foundations — in addition to classical Marxism, neo-Marxist approaches. The Chinese authors conclude, in this regard, that Russia is still facing the problem of choosing a geopolitical strategy, which in turn is due to the paradigmatic uncertainty of Russian science.

1. The absurd “Clash of Civilizations Theory”. Guangmingribao. 05/16/2019, edition-007. (In Chin.)

2. Analysis of the reports of the Singaporean media “One Belt — One Road” (2013–2017) : master’s thesis / Guangxi University. (In Chin.)

3. Bai Wenchang. Brief analysis of the theory of Russian Eurasianism // Bulletin of the PLA Institute of Foreign Languages. 2002. (In Chin.)

4. Wang Xuedong. A Study on International Recognition of the Belt and Road Initiative. The study of world socialism. 2020. (In Chin.)

5. Wang Hu, Li Mingjiang. Support, participation and coordination: the role of Singapore in the implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative. Study of the problems of Nanyang. Issue 4. 2016. (In Chin.)

6. Wang Huan. Brief analysis of Wallerstein’s world system theories. Teaching theories. 2011. (In Chin.)

7. Wang Zhengquan. Putin’s thinking in the Eurasian initiative // Newspaper of social sciences. 2013. (In Chin.)

8. Guo Shanxin. A brief overview of Wallerstein’s view of the “World System”. Social Science Jiangxi. 2000. (In Chin.)

9. Du Yupeng, Jn Lidong. Analysis of Eurasian cultural elements in Putin’s thinking. theoretical observation. 2015. (In Chin.)

10. Du Yupeng. Lost or Reborn: A Study of the Cultural and Ideological Trends of Russian Eurasianism. Heilongjiang University Press, Peking University Press. 2018.

11. Foreign Leaders Appreciate the Belt and Road Initiative // China Daily Newspaper. 04/26/2019. (In Chin.)

12. Li Yajun, Tang Shuai. Historical and cultural analysis of Russian Eurasianism. Russian literature and art. 2013. (In Chin.)

13. Li Yajun, Tang Shuai. Historical and cultural analysis of Russian Eurasianism. 2013. (In Chin.)

14. Martin Albrow. The prospects for the Belt and Road Initiative will be better in the post-epidemic era / transl. from English Xu Baofeng. Guangmingribao. 05.27.2020. (In Chin.)

15. Miao Ji. Belt and Road Initiative: Managing Expectations, Avoiding Risks and Strategic Responses. World Economic and Political Forum. Issue 3. 2017. (In Chin.)

16. Peng Yongqiang. Putin’s Eurasian Thinking and Building the Greater Eurasian Partnership: Master’s thesis / Institute of Diplomacy. 06.30.2021. (In Chin.)

17. Savitsky P. N. Eurasianism. A series of philosophical translations / translated by Feng Wen. 1992. (In Chin.)

18. Soviet civilization and the Eurasian idea: two centuries-long stories (to the 100th anniversary of the formation of the USSR and the formation of Eurasianism): a collective monograph / ed. by prof. Kefeli I. F.; foreword by Academician of the RAS Glazyev S. Yu. Saint Petersburg : Petropolis, 2022. 532 p. (In Rus.)

19. Xu Zhoyun. “Chinese Culture and World Culture”. Guizhou Culture Publishing House. 1997. (In Chin.)

20. Xiao Jinbo. Inspiration and reflection on the history of the development of Russian Eurasianism // Newspaper of Social Sciences of Jiamusi University. 2010. (In Chin.)

21. Tian Deven. What is wrong with “Clash of Civilizations” Publisher: People’s Forum. 2019. (In Chin.)

22. Huang Yuhao. Exploring Iran’s Understanding of the Belt and Road Initiative: Master’s Thesis. (In Chin.)

23. Zhao Hongxiang. A Cognitive Analysis of the Belt and Road Initiative of the Japanese Media—on the Example of Asahi Shimbun Messages : Master’s Thesis / Jilin University. (In Chin.)

24. Zhou Kun. A Study of Media Domestication Strategies in the One Belt, One Road Report in the United States. Based on research on the official websites of The Washington Post and The New York Times 05.2020. (In Chin.)

25. Zhou Shaoqing. There is no conflict between different civilizations // Newspaper of the Chinese Nation. 05/21/2019. (In Chin.)

26. Yuan Zhoxi, Zeng Yanchun. “Building a Chinese Narrative in Western Reporting” — Let’s take the One Belt, One Road report as an example // New York Times. (In Chin.)

27. Yang Mingmin. Eurasian consciousness in the works of Pushkin. Russian literature and art. 2021. (In Chin.)