год 2010-й - более 30.000.000 обращений

1. The idea of eurasiandom was formulated back in the twenties of last century. It has many aspects. Some of them are examined by natural sciences, the other ones belong to the humanitarian knowledge. Eventually it could be brought to the level of a detailed conception, which unfortunately never was. Meanwhile, the conception's basic features are already quite discrernible. It should be kept in mind, however, that while speculating on how to put the Eurasiandom conception into life, it would be advisable to be more particular about the "handy instruments" to implement the idea. And it will never be too early to initiate a problem discussion never awaiting until the conception contours are more clearly projected. The likely discussion would rather help translate the views into practical channels.

2. The above "instruments" could be, primarily, some of Russia's accomplishments in the economic sphere and, secondly, some moves by the international law. It is quite obvious that without Russia's economic advancement any most attractive conception of eurasiandom will ever dwell at a dead centre of sheer talking. It is evident that an economic success alone does not necessarily solve the conception's implementation problem. However, with the success being more tangible, the other "instrument" - namely, that of international legality, - should not be neglected, either, and at least outlined, if not yet outworked.

3. One needn't put too much stress on the CIS structure as to be an exclusive international and legal framework of eurasiandom. Of course, it plays its useful part in maintaining the relationship of the post-Soviet states. However, when it comes to a practical problem of more close economic re-integration and restoration of the needlessly interrupted economic, scientific and cultural ties (with a professed respect of each other's sovereignity, though), the CIS capacity alone just won't be adequate. There is a need of an international mechanism to stimulate the related process. The mechanism could be a confederation with its name in the air - the Eurasian Union.

4. The term of "confederation" will want a bit of commenting here. It is not a matter of creating any state, or any so called 'above-nation' international organisation. Judicially, 'confederate state' is a wrong definition. The international confederacy is a league of states, each of them being independent and sovereign. Actually, Switzerland is never a confederation, but a federation, and the official name of "Swiss Confederation" is just a cognizance of tradition.

5. The classic confederation is based on an international treatment and the unity of its members in foreign and military policies. Unlike member-states of regional organisations, the confederates would take the same platform at international bodies. Along with that, the present-time confederation is to maintain a close economic cooperation of its members, too.

6. The confederates could authorise a league representation to act on their behalf as an agent of international affairs, otherwise make it a subject of international law (such as a supervisor at international organisations). It does not necessarily mean that the confederation would get the above-state powers, i.e. take any commitments without approval and support of its members. Any issue would be given a solution by general concord in accordance with the adopted statute.

7. The established confederation could as well outgrow into a federation. But that should not yet be binding on the confederation of Eurasian Union, as its real development course is yet to be seen. Initially, it might be a preliminary looking on how the Union should be shaped minding the state interests of potential members. Anyway, as a confederation it should be most attractive for the ex-Soviet states, and presently be a step towards the political, economical, cultural and humanitarian integration in contrast to the CIS.