Abstract
The past century was in many respects an exceptional one for the European continent. Not only was it scarred by two World Wars, but it was at the same time marked by several economic and political integration processes. Some of these processes were democratic and economically motivated, whereas others were considered totalitarian and ideologically motivated. The twenty-first century is seeing a continuation of integrational processes. The EU’s most recent enlargement has both strengthened and weakened the European Union. In Eastern Europe, the Commonwealth of Independent States persists as a looser structure of post-Soviet states. It is often claimed that CIS integration mirrors the EU example. It is therefore interesting to look whether ‘parallels of integration’ really exist between the European Union and the integration initiatives among the members of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Second, the countries ‘in between’ deserve some attention as well. Both members of the CIS, Belarus and Ukraine simultaneously find themselves at the border of an enlarged Europe, and are often labelled ‘outsider states’. This chapter intends to assess divergent institutional developments and parallels of integration in Ukraine and Belarus after 1991.
‘When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow.’
(Anaïs Nin)
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Three different trajectories pointed out by Taras Kuzio (European, Westernizing, and Russophile) also illustrate these different paths, in T. Kuzio, ‘Promoting Geopolitical Pluralism in the CIS: GUUAM and Western Foreign Policy’, Problems of Post-Communism, 47 (2000): 25–35.
W. Powell and P.J. DiMaggio, The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1991).
D’Anieri, R. Kravchuk and T. Kuzio, Politics and Society in Ukraine (Boulder: Westview, 1999): 86.
Caiden, in M. Nordberg, ‘State and Institution Building in Ukraine’, in T. Kuzio (ed.), Contemporary Ukraine: Dynamics of Post-Soviet Transformation (London/NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1998): 41.
In Belarus, the legislature was overall weak and compliant. When reform minded Stanislau Shushkevich was, moreover, ousted from the Supreme Soviet chairmanship on claims of corruption, Kebich was in pole position for the 1994 presidential elections. Olga Belova rightly remarks that the situation in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine required a similar presidential model: ‘a famous Soviet administrative manager, who had been in charge of some high offices in the Communist Party apparatus and in central executive bodies, organizes the transfer of his position of power in the next presidential institution’, in O. Belova-Gille, ‘The Difficulties of Elite Formation in Belarus after 1991’, in E. Korosteleva, C. Lawson and R. Marsh (eds), Contemporary Belarus: Between Democracy and Dictatorship (London: Curzon Press, 2003): 57. This trajectory was most obvious in Belarus, since the institution of presidency was tailored to fit then Prime Minister Viacheslau Kebich.
W. Powell and P.J. DiMaggio, ‘The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields’, in American Sociological Review, 48 (1983): 147–60.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2007 Lien Verpoest
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Verpoest, L. (2007). Parallels and Divergences of Integration in Ukraine and Belarus. In: Malfliet, K., Verpoest, L., Vinokurov, E. (eds) The CIS, the EU and Russia. Studies in Central and Eastern Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230210998_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230210998_8
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-35604-1
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-21099-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)