Eurasian Economic Integration
Show Less

Eurasian Economic Integration

Law, Policy and Politics

Edited by Rilka Dragneva and Kataryna Wolczuk

In this well-researched and detailed book, the editors provide an extensive and critical analysis of post-Soviet regional integration. After almost two decades of unfulfilled integration promises, a new – improved and functioning – regime emerged in the post-Soviet space: the Eurasian Customs Union between Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan (ECU).
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 3: The legal and institutional dimensions of the Eurasian Customs Union

Rilka Dragneva


The creation of the Customs Union within the Eurasian Economic Community (hereafter ‘Eurasian Customs Union’ or ECU) and the subsequent deepening of the integration agenda have been accompanied by important changes in the legal and institutional framework for structuring cooperation. An improved legal regime has been put in place: one which binds member states, provides for supranational delegation and binding dispute resolution, and incorporates best international norms and practices. Furthermore, the regime claims to operate in transparent ways consistent with Russia’s undertakings on entering the World Trade Organization (WTO). In this sense, the ECU project is presented as a modern, rule-based common regime that is capable of delivering the benefits of advanced forms of economic integration. This claim, which is central to understanding the ECU as a regional integration grouping, is worthy of close scrutiny for a number of reasons. Firstly, in contrast to previous initiatives, the design of the ECU signals a radical and comprehensive move towards legalized integration. Previous initiatives (see Appendix 1) within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) have been consistently described as weak and fragmented, leaving the ordering of relationships to power politics and being unable to facilitate regional trade. The Eurasian Economic Community (EvrAzES) of 2000 was set up as a more robust international organization than the CIS; nonetheless, it failed to change the CIS institutional paradigm. While weakly legalized forms of cooperation are not necessarily without merit, the operation of complex trade and customs regimes requires the predictability, credibility and transparency associated with legality.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.