Search for the ideological basis of the EAEU. General integration and youth aspects

The article analyzes an issue of finding the ideological base for the Eurasian Economic Community in the context of the youth policy development of youth policy. The relevance of the topic under study is due not only to the complexity of the international situation that accompanies the formation of a new world order in the format of polycentrism, but also to the need to consolidate the efforts of the EAEU partner countries in the face of unprecedented economic and sanctions pressure on Russia and its allies. The purpose of the study is to determine the parameters of the ideological base of the EAEU, taking into account the needs of young people living in the countries of the integration association. To achieve the goal through the use of systemic and civilizational approaches and the historical-comparative method, the following research tasks were solved: the issues of ideological self-determination of the post-Soviet countries were characterized and the key elements of the common ideology of the EAEU for the younger generation – identified. Based on the results of the analysis, proposals were formulated that can be used in political practice related to the creation and improvement of the ideological base of the EAEU, as the most dynamically developing integration structure in the post-Soviet space. The key provisions of the study were tested in the course of a situational analysis implemented as part of the International Expert Session “Points of Growth – Kyrgyzstan” (Bishkek, Issyk-Kul region, Kyrgyz Republic, September 26–30, 2022).

EAEU, ideology, ideological self-determination, Eurasianism, integration, youth, development, polycentrism

1. Bereznyakov, D. and Kozlov, S. (2017), “Projecting the development strategy of the Eurasian Economic Union through the prism of the concept of alliances in the international relations’ ”, Tomsk State University Journal of History, no. 50, pp. 58–63.

2. Gapizov, Z. (2022), “Interaction of the Caspian littoral states in the field of environmental activities in the Caspian (1991–2021)”, Chelovecheskii kapital, vol. 160, no. 4, pp. 44–51.

3. Glaziev, S. and Kefeli, I. (2022), “On the question of the ideology of the Eurasian Economic Union”, Eurasian Integration, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 10–21.

4. Kondrashova, I. (2023), “Eurasian Association of Universities. Formation, main stages of activity, immediate prospects”, RSUH/RGGU Bulletin. Series “Eurasian Studies. History. Political Science. International Relations”, no. 1, pp. 129–142.

5. Maksimov, A. (2021), “Threats to national security of Russia in the context of a hybrid war, Central Russian Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 109–130.

6. Pantin, V. (2022), “The ideological foundations of Eurasian economic integration”, Vestnik RUDN. International Relations, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 17–29.

7. Sopilko, N. and Kulakov, A. (2019), “Prospects in developing integration processes for the Eurasian Economic Union”, RSUH/RGGU Bulletin. Series “Economics. Management. Law”, no. 4, pp. 105–115.

8. Kharitonova, N.I. (2021), “Conceptualization of the foreign policy of modern Russia in the context of constitutional reform”, in: Merkulov, P.A. and Malahova, O.V., ed., Konstitutsionnaya reforma i natsional’nye tseli razvitiya Rossii: sotsial’no-ekonomicheskie i politiko-pravovye prioritety: Sbornik statei i dokladov [Constitutional reform and development goals in Russia. Socio-economic, political and legal priorities. Collected articles and reports of an International Scientific and Practical Conference (December 2, 2020)], Izdatel’stvo Srednerusskogo instituta upravleniya – filiala RANKhiGS, Orel, Russia, pp. 26–28.

9. Kharitonova, N., and Leshchev, E. (2016), “Falsification of history as a threat to national security of Russia. Political aspect”, Central Russian Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 132–142.

10. Shevchenko, B. (2017), “The EEU. Contradictions of integrative interaction”, RSUH/ RGGU Bulletin. Series “Political Science. History. International Relations”, no. 4/2, pp. 313–319