The construction of “post-hegemonic multipolarity” in Eurasia: A comparative perspective

Efe Can Gürcan

Japanese Economy, 2020, vol. 46, issue 2-3, 127-151

Abstract: The 2000s witnessed tectonic changes in the pattern of international relations. Central to these changes is the crisis of global governance and the multipolarization of world politics. Against this backdrop, Eurasian regionalism led by China and Russia is rising as a major force in geopolitical multipolarization. Recent research in international relations attests to growing interest in Eurasian regionalism, with case studies focusing on individual regional mechanisms. Almost entirely absent, however, is comparative research as to how alternative initiatives may promote Eurasian cooperation in a post-hegemonic direction. My research seeks to advance both our empirical and theoretical knowledge of this emerging area. How do geopolitical and economic realignments shape Eurasian cooperation and conflicts in a post-hegemonic direction? What are the historical and institutional settings that are helping Eurasian countries to implement a post-hegemonic agenda of regional cooperation? Using incorporated comparison, this article focuses on the cases of the SCO, the CSTO, the EAEU, and the AIIB; these are regarded as the most coherent and inclusive alternative governance initiatives in the Eurasian region. I argue that post-hegemonic multipolarity in Eurasia finds its strongest expression in regional governance focused on security and economic cooperation at the expense of US global hegemony. These governance mechanisms arise from several competing but complementary initiatives led by China and Russia. A striking characteristic of these mechanisms is that their institutional design reflects a nontraditional security approach, combining conventional security governance with efforts at market and financial and academic integration, business community building, and youth mobilization. The post-hegemonic character of Eurasian regionalism mainly lies in how it provides competing, but coalescing and coexisting schemes for regional governance, which redress Sino-Russian competition into a peaceful framework and do not call for a frontal attack on the US. Their prospects are threatened by Russia and China’s current economic challenges.

Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/2329194X.2020.1839911 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:mes:jpneco:v:46:y:2020:i:2-3:p:127-151

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/MJES19

DOI: 10.1080/2329194X.2020.1839911

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Japanese Economy from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().