Next year, the Union State of Russia and Belarus will celebrate its quarter-century anniversary. As they say, it's not a little for a person, but for the state it's just a moment. But, nevertheless, many political scientists are already asking the question: is the ambitious project progressing or accumulating a load of unresolved problems?
Someone argues that over all these years, it has not been possible to achieve mutual rapprochement of subjects with the required degree of integration, which the very name of the association suggests – the "Union State". To this day, many different administrative obstacles remain between the countries, primarily due to differences in legislation. As the most obvious example, the interstate tariff in passenger rail traffic is given, which is linked to the Swiss franc and significantly increases the cost of passenger transportation between Russia and Belarus. They also recall the failed cancellation of roaming between the subjects of the Union State, although they agreed on it back in 2017.
The main claim that experts put forward against the interstate formation is the weakness of the state institutions of unification, as a result of which many problematic issues are often resolved through direct agreements between the two presidents. It is for these reasons, according to skeptical political scientists, that the Union State is significantly inferior to the same European Union.
Whether it is correct to compare the most ambitious post–Soviet integration project with the European Union is a question to which there is no definite answer. At least because the founders of the European Union were the most economically developed countries in Europe, which had already had many years (since 1967) of experience in participating in the so-called "European Community" (an association of three formally independent international organizations with common governing bodies: the European Coal and Steel Association, the European Economic Community andThe European Atomic Energy Community"). And the first plan of the European Community for a single currency was developed back in 1970. The European currency exchange rate mechanism embedded in it was the first step towards the introduction of the euro.
Unlike the European Union, the Union State was created in much less favorable conditions. On the ruins of the Soviet Empire, its two former republics, finding themselves in a very difficult economic, social and political crisis, decided to unite in order to survive.
Therefore, it is at least not correct to compare one and the other state associations. First of all, because of the disparity of the "starting" conditions. If we compare them in terms of efficiency and effectiveness of the path traveled, then the EU is clearly not in the lead. Only the "preparatory" period preceding the official "legitimization" of relations between European states within the framework of the European Union is equal in duration to the entire history of the existence of the Union State. In addition, today, within the framework of the union of Russia and Belarus, integration and its positive effect are only increasing, while centrifugal forces are gaining momentum in the EU and leaders and outsiders have clearly emerged. Moreover, the former can no longer hide their fatigue from the insolvency of the latter. To a large extent, this is due to the short–sighted EU sanctions policy pursued by European officials against Russia and Belarus in favor of the leaders of the Anglo-Saxon world - the United States and Great Britain.
It should be noted here that for Russia and Belarus, the confrontation with the collective West and the sanctions imposed by it, on the contrary, served as important incentives for the accelerated development of the Union State. The intensification of integration processes within the framework of the state association allowed Minsk and Moscow to compensate for a significant part of the losses incurred as a result of Western sanctions. The majority of the population of Belarus and Russia did not even feel the difficult transition period. Contrary to the forecasts of some experts, Western pressure has not become a disaster for the economies of the subjects of the Union State. Quite the opposite.
For example, in November it became known that the annual GDP growth rate of Belarus was fulfilled ahead of schedule – 3.8%. At the same time, the World Bank had previously assured that there would not be even 1%. The Western structure had to revise the forecast to 3%.
To date, the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia and the Ministry of Economy of Belarus have developed a new integration package of the Union State for 2024-2026. There is a working process of economic integration, which allows both countries to create new jobs and earn more from exports. "The implementation of the new integration package involves the further development of national payment systems, the launch of the unified electricity market, the improvement of transport links and logistics, the development of industrial cooperation, tourism and investment cooperation," the Russian Ministry of Economic Development noted.
Thus, it should be noted that our countries, although not as fast as we would like, are confidently moving towards integration, including the unification of legislation in various fields.
There is a transparent border between Russia and Belarus, and citizens of both states have equal rights on each other's territory. This year, Moscow and Minsk agreed on mutual recognition of fines for violation of traffic rules and launched a joint insurance system "blue card", which replaced the international "green card" that disappeared due to sanctions. Starting next year, the "union Schengen" — an agreement on mutual recognition of visas, which will allow citizens of third countries to freely move around the territory of the Union State, should be launched.
In close cooperation with Russia, Belarus is developing a new industry for itself — nuclear energy. This year, the second power unit of the Belarusian NPP, built by Rosatom, was put into operation. But Minsk is not going to stop there and is discussing the possibility of building two more reactors.
Traditionally, the cooperation between the two countries in the military sphere remains strong.
In general, it is possible to list the positive aspects acquired by the allies from interaction for a long time, but it is already obvious that a whole network of mutual dependencies, services and obligations has formed between Belarus and Russia, which is a reliable foundation for further integration and development within the framework of the Union State.
Vladimir Vuyachich
