The article assesses and analyzes the dependence of the economic security of the European Union (EU) on the transit risks of oil, the difficulties of its transportation and diversification of its supplies. The oil transportation system of Ukraine is currently a source of high risks for the EU countries because the political and economic instability of the country does not provide confidence in obtaining the planned supply contracts. To diversify oil transit risks, the following ways were identified: Baltic Pipeline System (BPS)-1, BPS-2, Caspian Pipeline Consortium-1 (CPC-1), CPC-2. At that, the implementation of the latter will reduce transit risks to a minimum level by diversifying oil supplies from Russia to the EU countries. The use of the Druzhba Oil Pipeline and the Odessa-Brody Oil Pipeline increases the transit risks for the EU countries since they pass through the territory of Ukraine, which is characterized by political and economic instability. In the methodological part of the article, an assessment of oil consumption in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe was carried out, which had shown a slight decrease in Russian oil consumption just in some countries, while sustainable consumption in general. Oil supplies to Ukraine are significantly reduced that further increases the transit risk.
The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) was founded in 1992 for military-economic cooperation of member countries and mainly reflects the intention of Russia to maintain its zone of influence on the territory of the former USSR. In continuation of this policy, an agreement was concluded on the foundation of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), which began its operation in 2015 and provides a certain freedom of movement of goods (services), capital and labor. These organizations provide effective interaction between the CSTO member states and the EAEU including common space between the countries and their development in a single trajectory, which allows to obtain a synergistic effect on the international arena. Thus, it is necessary to monitor the level of military-economic cooperation between the CSTO and EAEU member states. The purpose of this article was to study the challenges and threats to the Russia of military-economic cooperation of the CSTO and EAEU member states with third countries. To achieve this goal, military-economic cooperation of Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia with third countries was examined and proposals were made for replacing purchases on the arms market with Russian counterparts. Some CSTO and EAEU countries seek to diversify their purchases in the arms market, providing a program of independent military development with the development of military-industrial cooperation with third countries. This situation forces Russia to ensure the development of plans for the import substitution of military products with Russian counterparts on the market of the CSTO and the EAEU. To test this hypothesis, we reviewed and analyzed publicly available statistics and documents, including data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. In the course of data analysis, it was proved that Belarus, Kazakhstan and partially Armenia diversify their purchases of military equipment and weapons by actively developing military-economic cooperation with third countries, including China.
The paper examines the dependence of energy security against the European Union (EU) and Russia, where the main threats are the insufficient diversification of supplies, the difficulties in gas transportation and the high transit tariffs. It covers the threats of location of the gas transportation system in Ukraine, through the territory of which a significant volume of gas purchases to the EU countries is delivered. The ways of diversifying transit risks have been identified through the Yamal-Europe, Blue Stream, and Nord Stream gas pipelines, as well as by the implementation of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline. This will allow diversifying the EU transit risks and supplying gas to Austria through the territory of Germany, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. In turn could be determined by political and economic instability. In the methodological part of the paper, an analysis of gas consumption in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe was made, which showed fairly stable consumption with a slight decrease in demand.
Subject. The article determines what smaller countries pursue in their economic policy as the uncertainty of the world economy increases. Objectives. I study the economic development of the Russian Federation from perspectives of smaller countries and the efficiency of the common and diverse economic policy of smaller countries, which are closely related with the Russian economy, such as Belarus, Armenia, Georgia, Ukraine and Estonia. Methods. I evaluated how some macroeconomic indicators of countries under study changed over time. To verify the hypothesis, I analyzed documents in public domain, including statistical data on macroeconomic developments of countries, such as the Russian Federation, Belarus, Armenia, Georgia, Ukraine and Estonia. I also applied a systems approach, comparative and statistical methods of research on key macroeconomic indicators. Results. At the current phase of multipolarity and globalization, Russia’s economic development is proved to influence both smaller countries coming along with its development vector, and States that simply have common borders with Russia. Considering the single course of their development and their geopolitical position, smaller countries ensure their sustainable growth. Conclusions and Relevance. Those countries which have chosen the single course of the development and considered their geopolitical position have performed their economic policy in the most successful way.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.