Dear Friends, it’s a great honor and pleasure to be here and I wish to warmfully thank the organizers of this highly interesting conference. As a Swiss and an outsider of Eurasia, and as the last speaker of our 2-days meeting, I would like to summarize the general feeling I got after hearing so many diverse insights and points of view. I must say that I’m much more positive and optimistic than many of you.
In my opinion, that’s the first time in history that the Eurasian continent has been « unified » from Beijing to Minsk, from Moscow to Mumbai, in a peaceful way and by the will of its peoples and nations and not by a military conquest or by violence (as it was the case with Chinggis Khan or Timur-Lang several centuries ago).
The departure of the US troops from Afghanistan in 2021 could be considered as the last attempt of an external foreign power to divide, to occupy or to submit the Eurasian continent to its will, after the failure of the British empire to do it in the Nineteenth century Great Game.
The recent agreement signed by Iran and Saudi Arabia under the auspices of China has completed this move with the full integration of Shiite Iran and Muslim-Arabic world within the project of a pacified Eurasian continent. And even Afghan Taliban government is being on the way to be smoothly integrated in the Eurasian space.
This huge historical achievement has been accomplished in less than three decades, which is incredibly short and fast in terms of historical time. Who could imagine, 20 years ago, that Chinese communist party could talk and cooperate with Iranian Islamic Republic? Who could imagine in 2000 that Russia could cooperate with Turkey in Syria? Who could imagine that Shiites Iran could collaborate with Sunni Wahhabis’ Saudis?
If you look at the past centuries, the Eurasian regional big powers, such as Russia, Persia, Ottoman and Japanese Empires were competing between themselves in order to gain territories at the expenses of the neighboring ones, such as China, Central Asia, Caucasus or India.
But since the collapse of Soviet Union, a more collaborative approach among Eurasian countries has been slowly and patiently built despite regional boarders’ disputes and invasions (Chechen wars, Iraqi wars, Afghan occupation and now Ukrainian conflict, most of them provoked by external interventions and interferences under the mask of orange revolutions, of financial support to frustrated civil society NGOs, or of propaganda campaigns in favor of separatist movements).
How can we explain this success?
During these past three decades, a dense web of regional cooperation agreements and institutions have been set up in all domains, i.e., economy, security, energy, transportation, cultural exchanges. These cooperation agreements and institutions constitute a very dense network of connectivity. They are smooth, fluid, tailor-made, flexible, very diverse in size, reach and goals. CIS, SCO, CSTO, BRI, Eurasian Economic Union, Caucasus 3+, OPEC+, BRICS and many other formats, which are well represented in our forum today, testify about this peaceful construction of the Eurasian integration movement.
The conditions for positive working of Eurasian space are threefold: 1/the delicate balance of power between the main big players (Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, India mainly) should be preserved; 2/the respect of independence and an equal treatment vis-à-vis the smaller countries such as Caucasian and central Asian countries; 3/the conflict resolution system within the Eurasian space should be limited to the member countries without any foreign interference. The 2018 general agreement between the 5 countries of the Caspian Sea is an example of how this process should be led.
In that sense, the Eurasian project is the backbone of the emergent multipolar world and the main corridor of prosperity for the Twenty-first century. The chances to accomplish this historical project with success have never been so high and that’s our responsibility to achieve it without delaying it. If it doesn’t work in Eurasia, the multipolar world will not succeed in the other regions of the world.
***
But the obstacles are very high, as high as are the stakes. These impediments and dangers are security-linked and twofold. The first risk comes from the internal tensions and local/regional conflicts which could potentially degenerate into larger ones. We should keep in mind the recent Nagorno-Karabakh case between Azerbaijan and Armenia, bursts of violence at the kirgiz-tadjik-uzbek boarder in Fergana Valley las year, the frictions between India and Pakistan, or at India and China Himalaya boarder, as well as the China-Vietnam tensions in South-China.
But we have obviously more disturbing conflicts such as the Ukrainian or the Israeli-Palestinian ones, as well as the Taiwan case are which artificially provoked by United States. The last one is aimed to break China’s unity and sovereignty, yet legally recognized by the 1971 treaty signed by the US and the People’s Republic of China. These open conflicts are taking place at the forefront of the Eurasian continent. Each of them could represent major setbacks for the process of Eurasian peaceful construction. All these actual and potential conflicts must be carefully managed with the cooperation and support of all the members of the Eurasian community and cannot be solved only by the countries affected. And the balance of power within Eurasia should be carefully managed in order to preserve the stability and the positive dynamics of the project. It must be remembered that the time during which one power could expand at the expense of the neighboring one is over.
That’s especially important if we consider that the main threat against the Eurasian and multipolar project is coming from the Western powers which will try to do anything to undermine it, as this process will endanger the Western supremacy on the world order. As it has been framed by Wolfowitz doctrine (1992), Zbigniew Brzezinski (1997), Rand Corporation (2019) and other US neoconservative outlets, this is a struggle between maritime and continental powers in order to keep the control of trade, finance, natural resources as well as the manufacturing and agricultural capacities. This is also deeply tied to the western capitalist neoliberal system which, by definition, rejects all kind of limits to its development and growth.
In other words, the West will try to do anything in its power, use any available capacity to undermine Eurasian continental integration. These means will be military as we can see in Ukrainian conflict by supporting Ukraine at any cost, or with Israel conflict without to try to setup a real peace in Middle East between Israelis and Palestinians.
If we look carefully at the recent 2023 meetings, we can also observe an attempt from US and EU to crush Caucasus and Central Asia countries, hammering nails in them thanks to NATO cooperation deals, military exercises, and other investments facilities, as we could see in Armenia, Kazakhstan and other places. Thanks to “special dialogues” with Washington and Brussels, the central Asian countries are specifically targeted, as is Taiwan in the Pacific area. The West will use any Trojan horse to divide.
The present main targets are Georgia, where a new regime change is engaged and where an orange revolution is boiling, and Armenia with the recent decision of president Pashinian to get closer of NATO and US.
So, stability (but not immobility), connectivity (but not free migration), fair trade (but not dumping or pillaging practices), free circulation of ideas and values (but within a mutual respect framework) are the main goals of a sustainable Eurasian security. If these ways of doing are respected, I’m sure the Eurasian continent will overcome all the security challenges put on its path.
Szijjarto: comment préserver les relations Est-Ouest et éviter un nouveau rideau de fer entre deux blocs qui font péjorer l’Europe pour des décennies? 1/cessez le feu et ouverture de négociations diplomatiques ; 2/dialogue de civilisation dans un respect mutuel ; 3/rester ouvert, rationnels et bon sens en discutant avec tout le monde sans exclure la Russie et sans préconditions, politisation et idéologie.
Problème de l’UE : paix et prospérité étaiement son fondement et sa justification en 1957. Mais la paix a disparu largement par sa faute en Yougoslavie et en Ukraine avec décision de ne pas appliquer les accords de Minsk confirmée par Merkel et Hollande. Et la prospérité est en train de s’effondrer avec la chute de l’économie allemande provoquée par les choix catastrophiques faits en 2022. Comment l’économie européenne peut survivre si l’électricité et l’énergie y coûtent deux fois plus cher qu’en Chine ? Et que va-t-il se passer quand l0’Allemagne ne pourra plus payer les fins de mois de l’UE et soutenir l’euro grâce à ses surplus commerciaux ?
On dit que 5 millions d’Allemands n’ont plus de quoi se chauffer et se nourrir convenablement et se précipitent dans les magasins et les ventes de nourritures à bas prix où ils sont en concurrence directe avec les millions d’immigrés acceptés ces dernières années ?
La guerre à Gaza est le résultat direct de l’incapacité et de la non-volonté de l’Occident d’implémenter les résolutions des Nations Unies sur la Palestine et d’y faire la paix depuis 70 ans. Et donc de respecter et d’appliquer le droit international. Et le problème de l’Eurasie est la volonté de miner et saboter le processus de construction de l’Eurasie par tous les moyens. c’est le principal problème de sécurité de l’Eurasie. On doit construire cette coopération dans notre intérêt mutuel.
Iranien : ceux qui pensent que le changement est superficiel se trompent. Ceux qui qui pensent que le monde est toujours unipolaire et non multipolaire ou mieux transpolaire, se trompent aussi. Les changements du système international sont profonds, dans les valeurs, les acteurs du système et la distribution des pouvoirs et des capacités d’action.
La république islamique voit 4 modèles. Equilibre des pouvoirs, collective security model, or comprehensive security model which includes economy, food, disasters, connectivity, terrorism, poverty, energy and so on. Militarisme, military blocks, ingérences étrangères, compétition de blocs, unilatéralisme sont à prohiber comme l’a montré la guerre en Ukraine à cause de l’OTAN.
C’est aux pays de la région de résoudre ses problèmes et d’agir, et non à d’autres, et cela sur la base d’une inclusion de tous les acteurs sur une base égalitaire entre eux. Tout ce qui exclut un pays, un acteur ou introduit sur un acteur extérieur est à proscrire.
Pas de transition asymétrique entre Ouest et Est, pas d’unilatéralisme, convergence économique comme BRI,. Mais guerres, terrorisme, trafics de drogues, extrémismes.
Il faut continuer le dialogue pour construite l’architecture sécuritaire de la région, renforcer l’intégration économique, réformer la coopération pour la sécurité, créées des canaux de communications de dialogue et de recherche scientifique. MF
Guy Mettan, author, analyst in geopolitics and member of Geneva Parliament
Comments