• About
  • Advertise
  • Privacy & Policy
  • Contact
Tuesday, July 8, 2025
  • Login
  • Register
thehopper.news
  • Home
    • Home
    • About
  • Video
    • Discussion
  • Geopolitics
  • Intel & Security
  • Foreign Affairs
  • News
    • All
    • Politics
    • World

    Protests claim more lives in Kenya (VIDEO)

    Stop using the US dollar – Bolivian President

    Stop using the US dollar – Bolivian President

    Foreign spies using fake photo contest to collect intel in Russia – FSB

    Foreign spies using fake photo contest to collect intel in Russia – FSB

    India will ‘define BRICS in a new form’ next year – Modi

    India will ‘define BRICS in a new form’ next year – Modi

    Fully independent Palestinian state will pose threat to Israel – Netanyahu

    Fully independent Palestinian state will pose threat to Israel – Netanyahu

    Trump promises to resume delivering weapons to Ukraine

    Trump promises to resume delivering weapons to Ukraine

    World doesn’t need an emperor – Lula

    World doesn’t need an emperor – Lula

    Trump announces stinging tariffs on US allies in Asia

    Trump announces stinging tariffs on US allies in Asia

    Hypocritical EU ‘totally complicit in Gaza genocide’ – former MEP

    Hypocritical EU ‘totally complicit in Gaza genocide’ – former MEP

    Russian general arrested on corruption charges

No Result
View All Result
thehopper.news
No Result
View All Result
Home News

The idea of ‘Eurasia’ is much more viable than ‘Europe’ – here’s why

by Admin
May 25, 2025
in News, Politics, World
0
The idea of ‘Eurasia’ is much more viable than ‘Europe’ – here’s why
27
SHARES
108
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Published: May 25, 2025 1:45 pm
Author: RT

The West won’t go away – Eurasia must learn to manage it

For a Eurasian state, total isolation from Western Europe is not only undesirable, it is likely impossible. For those genuinely committed to the project of a cooperative and developmental Eurasian space, the key political challenge is finding a way to manage external influences – chiefly from the NATO bloc in Europe and North America – that cannot be eliminated, even in theory. The task ahead is to mitigate the risks posed by these actors, while extracting whatever limited benefits can be found in their inevitable presence, all without allowing external pressure to provoke internal splits within Eurasia.

Even as Russia strengthens its cooperation with partners to the south and east, the enduring economic and technological capacities of the EU and the US cannot be ignored. History demonstrates that relatively closed zones of cooperation emerge only under two conditions: either through total external opposition, or under the hegemony of a dominant power willing to bear the costs of leadership. Neither of these applies to Greater Eurasia.

First, the states of Eurasia have no interest in detaching themselves from the global economy. Second, there is no Eurasian hegemon prepared to sacrifice its own development to dominate the continent. Third, no one is suggesting Eurasia should become an isolated bloc. The US, EU, and key Middle Eastern states will continue to play important roles in the global economy. Regardless of political hostilities, they still provide market access, technology, and trade.

Some see the EU as a model of regional self-containment – a “garden,” to quote one of its more misguided recent metaphors. But even Western Europe’s famed unity has relied heavily on continued openness to the US and, to a lesser degree, China. Only with respect to Russia and the Global South has the EU pursued genuine exclusion. Even then, the strategy remains incomplete and largely rhetorical.

The West’s attempt to encircle itself with legal and institutional “fences” has created a fragile enclosure, but one constantly tested by global realities. Meanwhile, Russia and its partners have been left outside this structure, prompting renewed thinking about the viability of an open Eurasia as an alternative.

Read more

FILE PHOTO. Russian servicemen of the group of forces ‘South’ take part in combat training at an unknown location.
A new front: Russia expands into Ukraine to build a military buffer zone

Could Eurasia construct a self-sufficient development community? Theoretically, yes. But unlike Europe after World War II, Eurasia lacks a single leader prepared to organise such an effort. The United States attempted something similar with its global leadership in the second half of the 20th century, but even Washington now appears exhausted by the effort. American voters have repeatedly signaled their preference for reducing overseas commitments.

China, while economically formidable, is unlikely to assume a leadership role in Eurasia. Its political culture does not favour hegemonic ambitions abroad, and the risks of taking responsibility for a region this vast would likely outweigh any conceivable gains. Moreover, Russia, China, and India are roughly comparable in power and have no appetite for a zero-sum struggle to dominate the continent. The success of BRICS and the SCO underscores this reality: mutual respect, not dominance, is the basis of Eurasian cooperation.

Instead of trying to copy the Western European model or isolate themselves from the West entirely, Eurasian states should seek to engage the global economy pragmatically. Sanctions against Russia, even those of unprecedented scale, have not dismantled international trade. The global economy has proved remarkably resilient. Middle-sized and smaller countries require open markets to grow; major powers like Russia, China, and India need them to deploy their immense logistical and industrial capacities. 

It would be unrealistic – and counterproductive – for Eurasian powers to sever links with the world economy. The real goal should be to neutralise the political toxicity of Western Europe and the United States, while ensuring that their presence does not fracture Eurasian unity. This requires careful coordination, strategic patience, and shared vision among like-minded partners.

If the objective is to prevent the leading Western European countries from hindering the development of Russia and its partners, then the strategy must be subtle. Direct confrontation or blanket isolationism won’t work. The EU cannot be eliminated from the equation, and the US will remain a global factor for the foreseeable future. The question is not how to remove them entirely, but how to reduce their negative influence and prevent external powers from sowing discord within Eurasia.

The path forward lies in building a resilient, open Eurasian platform that can absorb external shocks without disintegrating. It should engage globally, but on its own terms. This is not a utopian vision – it is a practical necessity.

This article was first published by Valdai Discussion Club, translated and edited by the RT team.

Full Article

Tags: Russia Today
Share11Tweet7
Previous Post

Africa: Legacy of the Great Leaders

Next Post

BRICS offers hope for Africa’s future – Mandela’s granddaughter

Admin

Admin

Next Post

BRICS offers hope for Africa’s future – Mandela’s granddaughter

thehopper.news

Copyright © 2023 The Hopper New

Navigate Site

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Privacy & Policy
  • Contact

Follow Us

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms bellow to register

*By registering into our website, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.
All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In

Add New Playlist

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
    • Home
    • About
  • Video
    • Discussion
  • Geopolitics
  • Intel & Security
  • Foreign Affairs
  • News

Copyright © 2023 The Hopper New

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used. Visit our Privacy and Cookie Policy.