After the collapse of the USSR, Russia and its legal successor, has been confronted with the need to rethink its role in the world, the definition of new priorities and values of its foreign policy. At the beginning of the 2000s. She refused to accept the proposed US their allies unipolar system of international relations, put forward his concept of multipolarity, which became one of the pillars of program documents how foreign policy concept of the Russian Federatsii.1Schitaya himself one of the States with grounds to claim the role of a pole in the international relations, Russia has made significant efforts to ensure that, on the one hand, to show the independence of the policy carried out by it, and on the other - to become culturally and economically attractive state and a reliable political partner. Since the basis of a polycentric vision of a world founded geographical principle (the principle of regional influence), the priority vector of Russian foreign policy, it was post-Soviet states prostranstvo2-, historically, economically and culturally closely, if not inextricably linked with Russia. With the increasing severity and tension in the international situation, while maintaining the threat of isolation, the Russian Federation, more and more interested in how to find, or invent some "buckles" for intensification of integration processes in the region and to reduce inconsistencies between its member states. Find the economic grounds for rapprochement has been the most simple solution, deliver, however, Russia, in most cases, to the position of the donor, who was forced to keep the Allies substantial financial costs. In addition, with such a purely mercantile system of the Russian Federation, the relationship falls into greater dependence on the fluctuations of the world economy, in particular oil prices. The instability created by the initiative of the three closest idea of a "Eurasian integration", the States of Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus, - associations, losing in the summer of 2008. information war, significant increase in demand for ideological filling formed after vacuum collapse of the USSR forced Moscow to put on the agenda the question of the need to search for a national idea, revise historical policy, and finally formulate some general "formula" that would have led to the creation of a single "Eurasian identity" . In 2016. Russian President Vladimir Putin has once again raised the question about the meaning of identity at a meeting of the Valdai Club, emphasizing chtovopros gaining and strengthening of national identity really is fundamental to Russia. "The issue of gaining and strengthening of national identity really is for Russia the fundamental nature of 'third, pointing out that identity can not be built within any ideology, but must carry out combining function, have a" non-ideological "nature," all of us - and so called neoslavyanam and neozapadnikam, statists, and the so-called liberals, the whole of society - will work together on the formation of common development goals. We need to get rid of the habit of hearing only ideological adherents, from the threshold, with anger, and even hatred rejecting any other point of view. "4 Two years earlier, the President identified the creation of the Eurasian Economic Union as a way to "save a myriad of civilization, spiritual threads that unite our peoples" .5vopros gaining and strengthening of national identity really is fundamental to Russia harakter.vopros gaining and strengthening of national identity really is fundamental to Russia character. In addition, for the development of specific ideas that would not only consolidated the Russians, but also rallied to the republic's post-Soviet region around Russia emerge as the leading Russian politicians and public figures, and representatives of the intellectual elite. For example, one of the leading ideologues of the modern Eurasian A.Dugin virtually identifies the implementation of the concept of a multipolar world with the successful implementation of the Eurasian project "Eurasianism - is building a multi-polar world, in which Russia should go beyond its national borders." 6 A R.Grinberg, director of the Institute of Economics at the round table of the Federation Council on November 24, 2011, devoted to integration issues, said that "" in this union, along with economic pragmatism should be uniting spiritual civilization beginning ... "7.Podobnyh above beliefs often held by representatives of the former Soviet republics, pro-Eurasian integration and support closer relations with Russia. So, who served as Chairman of the Majilis of the Parliament of Kazakhstan until 25 March 2016.K.K.Dzhakupov, considering the priority vector of economic integration recognizes that the integration processes on the post-Soviet space have tremendous historical and cultural base and the successful development of the formation of the Eurasian space will serve as one of the poles of a multipolar mira8. It is noteworthy that, despite the huge differences in complexity and content of this promise, ranging from greatly simplified, populist programs to polysyllabic, of detailed scientific concepts, we can say that there was consensus on the need for some unifying principles and tend to grant Russian master, or one of the leading (in conjunction Russia-Kazakhstan), the role in this process.However, the establishment of sustainable linkages between nations that once made up the as the Union republics of the USSR, through the creation of bases for the formation of identity and its "cultivation" is complicated by many factors (too high a level of cultural, linguistic and religious diversity, the rise of nationalism in the post-Soviet space and etc.) that make the achievement of this goal is a challenge that can not be solved by state propaganda and historical policy and the study of this problem statement is particularly relevant. In the current situation of foreign policy, Russia has to deal with new threats and challenges caused, in particular, the protracted conflict in Ukraine, the adoption of anti-Russian sanctions, the depreciation of oil and the final erosion of trust in relations with the West; On the other hand, she was confronted with the pressing need to achieve their "consolidating, unifying" potential, seeking to avoid international isolation, ensuring the most close cooperation with its closest neighbors. Soyuz is a Eurasian integration project in the Eurasian space, the purpose of which is the economic and political rapprochement between the post-Soviet countries, and the project is potentially open to many other countries of Eurasia. To date momentuevraziyskaya integratsiyarealizovana in the form of a number of unions of different levels and depths, the most important of which are the EAEC Customs Union and the Eurasian Economic Union. May 29, 2014 on the basis of the Customs Union and the Common Economic Space was created a more advanced form of integration -Evraziysky Economic Union (EAEC), which began its work on 1 January 2015. Chairman of the EAEC Belarus was in 2015, in 2016 the chairman of Kazakhstan. Thus is formed the total number of market of 183 million people, enhanced integration compared to integration at the level of the Customs Union. Allied -Kazakhstan State RossiyaiBelarus and takzheArmeniyaiKirgiziya- undertake to guarantee the free movement of goods and services, capital and labor, as well as the implementation of coordinated policies in the energy, industry, agriculture, transport. If the identity of the phenomenon, as we learned above, so many meanings and is full of paradoxes, the refinement of "Eurasian" identity only adds fuel to the fire. What is Eurasia?Eurasianism? What are the chances of this concept in the modern cultural and geopolitical situation? Do not involve us again phantoms? What is the ideological basis of Eurasianism and whether rethinking teaching in the spirit of contemporary postmodern strategies, cross-cultural communication and globalization? Does it make sense now to talk about the Eurasian integration Eurasian Eurasian culture and identity? It seems clear that the idea of Eurasianism, which again raised the shield on the President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, is designed to integrate the broken unity of post-Soviet states, find that their union was not a whim of history, but a natural, caused by centuries of economic, cultural, social, anthropological interaction. Nostalgia for a bygone unity is also not something ephemeral, which can be quickly heal. It is caused by the fact that the Eurasian nations strongly linked by common historical destiny. The idea of Eurasianism includes, of course, a powerful potential for integration, the call coming from the depths of history and echoing of future times. But with all this idea causes increased resistance, moreover, a sharp polemic, sarcastic criticism from many Russian and Kazakh intellectuals. First unhappy, more precisely, are outraged by the Eurasian conception - detach Russia from the enlightened Europe and to reconcile with the dark, stagnant Asia. Come, they reason; Russia since the days of Rurik Eurasian country, and there is no need to drag it into aziatschinu where "the smell of smoke and dung nomadic". Russia linked to Europe spiritually, are two halves of a unified Christendom. The Kazakh side also heard angry voices not better to say goodbye to the outmoded idea and focus on the Central Asian integration? In the heat of debate used strong language, we are prudently omitted. Something however, very serious lies behind the Eurasian concept, if so warmly and excitedly discussed it on both sides. Eurasianism, and is a well known fact, emerged as a doctrine, ideology, social movement as a response to two global factors in world history: the Bolshevik revolution and the crisis of the culture of the Western type. In the study of the Eurasian concept in most cases, taking into account the first and lose sight of the second. As a result, the philosophical meaning of Eurasianism and the possibility of treatment of the Eurasian idea in the modern social and cultural context are lost. I think the conceptual renewal of the Eurasian concept and themes Eurasian identity from the standpoint of today's demands and agendas suggests tselostky analysis exercises, which would find direct postmodern implications and motives nomadologicheskie Eurasianism, introducing it into a modern socio-cultural discourse. The thesis may seem far-fetched, inspired by the fashionable postmodern passages. But let's not jump to conclusions. Appeal to the Eurasian texts confirm the above, and finds an apparent paradox: Nick Troubetzkoy, a recognized theoretician and Eurasian leader, begins with a critique of Eurocentrism His thoughts sound refrain ideas Danilevsky and Spengler, but they appeared quite independently of them, except for the dependency of the total time of need , put on the agenda of rethinking the western model of culture, the traditional type of rationality Europe. This is common to all Western and Russian thinkers theme announced already Kergegorom and Nietzsche; criticism of logocentrism, rational-centrism and ethnocentrism, the search for new types of rationality in the Western ways of rapprochement with the East. Troubetzkoy expresses the spirit of the time, denouncing Eurocentrism. It is important that he does not reject European culture as such and does not try to replace the old hierarchical structure aziatsentrizmom. He thought only of postmodern attitude: rejection of any and all claims to the center, ie, detsentrizatsiya any and all structures, codes, metaphysical models of consciousness, ethnic identity stey. What later sound with full force in the post-modern studios and will provide a powerful resonance in the contemporary cultural environment. The paradox predoboznachen. Exposing European ethnocentrism, pulling Russia to Asia, insisting on the essence of the Eurasian Russian, Troubetzkoy expressed ideas postevropeyskie (detsentrizatsiya - one of them), ie It is included in the field of attraction of European culture. His ideas about transformations in linguistics had a decisive impact on the European post-structuralism, in particular, on the semiology of Roland Barthes, thereby rejecting Eurocentrism, Troubetzkoy works for the benefit of European culture. And it proves once again that there is no isolationist, closed ethnic or civic identity is unthinkable in the era of globalization. Originating as a reaction to Bolshevism and hoped bolshevistkoy oppose the idea of another, even more fundamental and large-scale idea of Eurasianism thought out other ground integration and national identity. Peoples zhivivshee centuries in Eurasia, have a single identifiable structure: it is a joint Eurasian values, common historical destiny, .kulturnye, economic and anthropological connections. Is this procedural historically izmenchvaya Eurasian ethnic identity, or rather - between civilizations, or, finally, based on the socio-political, government settings?Apparently, we can talk about the different modes of Eurasian identity. First of all, as shown by the Eurasians, the basis of this identity is interethnic interaction. In this sense, the Eurasian identity can be interpreted as superethnic And this - the main line of reasoning and the first Eurasians, and Lev Gumilyov. But in addition, Eurasian identity can be considered as inter-civilizational, cultural environment if the Turkic and Slavic, respectively - will be interpreted as an independent civilization. This approach was implemented Gumilyov and developed in domestic science particularly interested past decade. Finally, it is necessary to take into account the socio-economic and political parameters of the Eurasian identity, because in the long history of the Eurasian Association of Eurasian peoples were carried out several times in public education. Experience of Genghis Khan, when the Slavs lived two hundred years as a part of a great empire -only one of these successful examples of associations of Eurasia.Eurasian theorists, especially Gumilyov, focuses on Eurasia as superethnos, ieEthnic basics Eurasian identity. In the present situation, this approach seems to be most relevant. In the post-Soviet Eurasian identity is primarily inter-ethnic origin. Moreover, in several senses. If you take an independent Kazakhstan, the Eurasian identity is significant for domestic policy and foreign policy of the Republic. For the inside, because the dominant ethnic groups in Kazakhstan are Kazakh and Russian (Turks and Slavs). Their inter-ethnic cooperation is the foundation of the Eurasian identity. At the same time, in Kazakhstan, home to many ethnic groups, non-historically in the Eurasian region - the Germans, Poles, Turks, Armenians and others. Therefore common Kazakh identity does not coincide fully with the Eurasian identity. At this point, we need serious analytical work to consider the ratio of the Kazakh and Eurasian identity that necessarily introduces the topic of ethnic identity as the leading motive of identity-citizenship.Eurasian identity in Kazakhstan - not a mode of desired or proper, but commonplace, though, and often explosive reality. In fact, if the Kazakh since childhood speaks Russian, so Russian, so Russian culture and become family for him, is not it represents a Eurasian identity? Or, on the contrary, Russian, imbibed with mother's milk Kazakh language and culture so that they become family to him, Is not he a distinct Eurasian identity (such Russian however, much smaller than the Russian-speaking Kazakhs). After all, the language - the first interpreter of the world and the environment hermeneutic communication. The structure of language determines the type of mentality, "sculpts" the archetypes of the collective unconscious and even determines the characteristics of social institutions. This approach was implemented Gumilyov and developed in domestic science particularly interested past decade. Finally, it is necessary to take into account the socio-economic and political parameters of the Eurasian identity, because in the long history of the Eurasian Association of Eurasian peoples were carried out several times in public education. Experience of Genghis Khan, when the Slavs lived two hundred years as a part of a great empire -only one of these successful examples of associations of Eurasia. Eurasian theorists, especially Gumilyov, focuses on Eurasia as superethnos, ie Ethnic basics Eurasian identity. In the present situation, this approach seems to be most relevant. In the post-Soviet Eurasian identity is primarily inter-ethnic origin. Moreover, in several senses. If you take an independent Kazakhstan, the Eurasian identity is significant for domestic policy and foreign policy of the Republic. For the inside, because the dominant ethnic groups in Kazakhstan are Kazakh and Russian (Turks and Slavs). Their inter-ethnic cooperation is the foundation of the Eurasian identity. At the same time, in Kazakhstan, home to many ethnic groups, non-historically in the Eurasian region - the Germans, Poles, Turks, Armenians and others.Therefore common Kazakh identity does not coincide fully with the Eurasian identity. At this point, we need serious analytical work to consider the ratio of the Kazakh and Eurasian identity that necessarily introduces the topic of ethnic identity as the leading motive of identity-citizenship. Eurasian identity in Kazakhstan - not a mode of desired or proper, but commonplace, though, and often explosive reality. In fact, if the Kazakh since childhood speaks Russian, so Russian, so Russian culture and become family for him, is not it represents a Eurasian identity? Or, on the contrary, Russian, imbibed with mother's milk Kazakh language and culture so that they become family to him, Is not he a distinct Eurasian identity (such Russian however, much smaller than the Russian-speaking Kazakhs). After all, the language - the first interpreter of the world and the environment hermeneutic communication. The structure of language determines the type of mentality, "sculpts" the archetypes of the collective unconscious and even determines the characteristics of social institutions.This approach was implemented Gumilyov and developed in domestic science particularly interested past decade. Finally, it is necessary to take into account the socio-economic and political parameters of the Eurasian identity, because in the long history of the Eurasian Association of Eurasian peoples were carried out several times in public education. Experience of Genghis Khan, when the Slavs lived two hundred years as a part of a great empire -only one of these successful examples of associations of Eurasia. Eurasian theorists, especially Gumilyov, focuses on Eurasia as superethnos, ie Ethnic basics Eurasian identity. In the present situation, this approach seems to be most relevant. In the post-Soviet Eurasian identity is primarily inter-ethnic origin. Moreover, in several senses. If you take an independent Kazakhstan, the Eurasian identity is significant for domestic policy and foreign policy of the Republic. For the inside, because the dominant ethnic groups in Kazakhstan are Kazakh and Russian (Turks and Slavs). Their inter-ethnic cooperation is the foundation of the Eurasian identity. At the same time, in Kazakhstan, home to many ethnic groups, non-historically in the Eurasian region - the Germans, Poles, Turks, Armenians and others.Therefore common Kazakh identity does not coincide fully with the Eurasian identity. At this point, we need serious analytical work to consider the ratio of the Kazakh and Eurasian identity that necessarily introduces the topic of ethnic identity as the leading motive of identity-citizenship. Eurasian identity in Kazakhstan - not a mode of desired or proper, but commonplace, though, and often explosive reality. In fact, if the Kazakh since childhood speaks Russian, so Russian, so Russian culture and become family for him, is not it represents a Eurasian identity? Or, on the contrary, Russian, imbibed with mother's milk Kazakh language and culture so that they become family to him, Is not he a distinct Eurasian identity (such Russian however, much smaller than the Russian-speaking Kazakhs). After all, the language - the first interpreter of the world and the environment hermeneutic communication. The structure of language determines the type of mentality, "sculpts" the archetypes of the collective unconscious and even determines the characteristics of social institutions.
References: 1. GV Vernadsky Eurasianism: the declaration, the wording of the theses. Prague. 1932 2. LN Gumilyov "Historical and philosophical writings of Prince NS Trubetskoy ". Leningrad. 1990 3. LN Gumilyov "Eurasian Chronicle."Lenigrada. 1989 4. LN Gumilyov "Ethnogenesis and biosphere of the earth."Leningrad. 1990 5. JJ Kofner "Russian philosophy: Essay classical Eurasianism".2010 /http://www.mesoeurasia.org/archives/2915 6. Perov M. "Eurasianism Nazarbayev." 2011 /http://www.mesoeurasia.org/archives/3631 7. PN Savitsky"Eurasianism as a historical purpose." 8. Praga.1927 of PN Savitsky"Geographical and geopolitical foundations of Eurasianism." Prague. 1933 9. NS Troubetzkoy "Exodus to the East". Prague. 1921 Read 121 times
