To what extent is the College of the Eurasian Economic Commission a core driver of regional integrat

Introduction

The Eurasian Economic Union is established by Astana treaty which was signed on 29th May 2014 and came in to force in 1st January 2015. The Eurasian Project is believed as the further integration of the Eurasian Custom Union and the Single Economic Space.[1] The EAEU is aimed in to the economic integration and interdependency of states, which in previous ware a part of the Soviet Union. The development of EAEU is an attempt to build similar institution as the European Union.[2] The EAEU includes several institutions, as Supreme Council, Intergovernmental Council, Council of Eurasian Economic Commission, Collegium of Eurasian Economic Commission, and Court of EAEU. The core engine of integration in the European project is believed as European Commission, in the case EAEU the supranational institution of EAEU is the Eurasian Economic Commission, and its executive body is the Collegium. It is permeant regulator of regional integration. It is important to notice the hegemony status of Russian Federation, moreover, Russia economic contribution on the Union is significantly higher that other member states.[3] However, the Union is established as rule based, which underlines the equality among member states. This essay is going to examine structure, decision making, and achievements of the Collegium of EEC through neofunctionalism as integrational theory and sociological institutionalism as governance theory and argue that the Collegium of the EEC is the core driver of regional integration.

Theoretical framework of integration

Neofunctionalist theory suggest that in terms of integration, the international organizations are more important than the state.[4] Moreover, the European Commission is the most believed as the most important non-state actor within the European Union, that manages the integrational process, due to its unique ability to influence the domestic and international policies.[5] The Collegium of EEC, is constructed as the supranational institution. In other words, it is the non-state, actor which has the ability to influence on domestic and international level, by implementing the integrational policies. There are four main arguments of neofunctionalism: first, the concept of “state” is more complicated than realist the definition; second, the activities of interest groups are not limited into domestic level; third, the importance of non-state actors in international politics; forth, the spillover effect is has significant pressure on the integrational process.[6]

The new institutionalism evaluates the importance of the institutions.[7] In case of the European Union, after the Lisbon treaty, institutions has gained legal basis for its functional power. The division of power within the institutions is the key functional ability of European Union. There are three varieties of new institutionalism: first, rational choice institutionalism, second, historical institutionalism, and third, sociological institutionalism.[8] The sociological institutionalism has three main features: first, the definition of “institution” is blurred, due to the fusion of “institution” and “culture; second, the institution has deeper effect on the preference and variation of identities of state; third, the formation and development of institutions are influenced by the contribution to social legitimacy rather than efficiency.[9] The political situation in the EAEU region is more specific that in the EU, due to the lack of democracy. On other hand, the general development of the EAEU cane be examined through sociological intuitionalism.

Legal Basis and Structure of Collegium of the EEC

The legal basis for the Collegium of EEC is stated in the Article 18 of Treaty on Eurasian Economic Union.[10] According to the Article 18, The Eurasian Economic Commissions is composition of Council and Collegium, There are ten commissioners in the Collegium of the EEC, in other words, two commissioners from each member state.[11] The commissioners are appointed by the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council, on the basis of 4 year and possibility to prolongation, the position of chairman rotates in 4 years term, without possibility of prolongation.[12] The College of EEC’s current chairman is Armenian Commissioner Tigran Sarkisyan. The commissioners are required to have work experience in governmental structure for more than 7 years, and at least 1-year on executive position.[13] The status of federal minister will be granted for every member of commissioner. The commissioners are required to act independently from interest of the state, they are not allowed to request or directed by state.[14] In other words, it is supranational entity of the EAEU.

The ability of the Supreme Eurasian Council to appoint and dismiss the commissioner, can be understood the sociological institutionalist theory. According to the sociological institutionalism, there are significant fusion of “cultural” and “institution”.[15] The specific ability to directly appoint and dismiss the commissioner is due the authoritarian political culture of the region. On the other hand, despite to the hegemonic status of Russian federation as significant economic dominance, there are only two commissioners Russia. It can also be explained from the sociological intuitionalism. One of the features of sociological institutionalism argues that the formation of institutions structure is influenced by the culture of its region.[16] It underlines the equality among the member states, as one of the main agendas of the EAEU. The equality is developed in order to prevent the dominance of pro-Russian policies, as the specific feature of the regional relations between the states. The requirement of commissioner’s independency from the state, and the restriction of request and directed by stated, the fundamental in formulation of a supranational institution. It is emphasizing non-state actor status of Collegium of the EEC, as the feature in neofuctionalist integrational theory.

Decision making accountability

There is significant inequality in the economic inputs of countries into the Union, for instance, Russian is accountable for more than 85 per cent of overall GDP of the Union. It demonstrates the hegemony status of Russian Federation within the region.[17] Therefore, According to the Article 18, paragraph 2 of the Treaty of EAEU, each commissioner has equal voting power in the Collegium of EEC.[18] It is important in case of the EAEU, in order to prevent pro-Russian policies to be implemented. The decision in the College of EEC is made by qualified majority or consensus, however there are significant amount of policies areas that is reserved for Council Of EEC to discuss[19]. In this case it is politically sensitive areas which is leaved to representatives of the state to discuss, in order to protect national interest.

The structure of College of EEC is organized by the Supreme Eurasian Council, the head of the state reserves the right to dismiss the individual commissioner, as a member of the Supreme Eurasian Council.[20] The Supreme Eurasian Council is significantly powerful institution. It is argued as the main integrational power, which decides the budgetary issues, regional development, and implementation of the treaty.[21] The decision and orders adopted by the Supreme Eurasian Council, Intergovernmental Council, and Council of EEC should be executed by Collegium of EEC.[22] Hence, it is the main executive institution within the Union. However, the Council of EEC reserves the right to amend or oversees the acts adopted by the Collegium, also the act could be rejected.[23] According to the Commission regulation, the Collegium of EEC is accountable to the Council within the institution.[24] In combination with the power of amendment and regulation on the acts and decision accepted by the Collegium, its accountability is important mechanism in order to protect the national interest, and/or avoid pro-Russian policies to be implemented.

There are politically sensitive areas in the EAEU, which may affect the national interest. The structure and accountability of commissioners are limited by the national interest, in forms of Council of EEC. The decision making which is qualified majority, or some cases consensus. These features of the institution can be examined. From the sociological intuitionalist perspective. It is the cultural feature of the region, which affects the formulation of decision making, and structure of the institution.

Questioning the supranational status

The College of EAEC is created as the supranational institution, which manages integration of the EAEU. However, As it was discussed before, the acts adopted by college can be amended and regulated or even rejected by the Council of EEC. The Council of EEC consists deputy prime ministers of the member states. In other words, the acts and regulation made by college is examined by the representatives of national government. Moreover, according to Dragneva and Wolczuk, the politically sensitive areas are discussed in the Council of EEC, in order to prevent the policies imposed against national interest, in case of the EAEU it is significantly important due to the Russian hegemony.[25] In terms of decision making power and its implementation the College of EAEC is limited by national interest.

Since Astana treaty it lost some of its supranational power, such as the ability to bring the member countries before court in case of non-compliance.[26] In other words, the Astana treaty has significantly restricted the power College. In comparison with the Board of European Commission, the ability to sue members states in case of noncompliance is a significant tool to ensure the integrational process of European Union and underlines its supranational status.

The Decision #24

The decision #24 approves the regulation of classification norms of equipment for the manufacturing of ice cream in the EEC. The basis for the decision is Paragraph 1 of Article 22 of Treaty of the Customs Code of the Eurasian Economic Union. This Paragraph empower the Commission to decide and clarify on the classification of different kinds of goods. In other words, in case the classification of goods in each country custom is different from each other, then the Commission has a power to regulate and create a single classification in the Eurasian Economic Union. The Treaty of Customs Code of the Eurasian Economic Union was adopted on 4th of November 2017 and enters to force on 1st January 2018. The decision #24 requires the regulation and classification of the different kind of equipment for manufacturing ice cream from foreign economy. Subsequently, the decision entries in to force after 30 calendar days after the publication.

The decision to regulate the classification of different kind of goods can be explained by neofunctionalism theory. The neofunctionalism theory claims that the non-state actors are more important than state.[27]In this case, the College of the Eurasian Economic Commission, which in supranational institution, regulates the areas which should be regulated by a sovereign country. The European Commission for neofunctionalists is believed to be the most important non-state international actor, which has a unique position to regulate national and international pressure on the government to advance the integration.[28] The Eurasian Economic Commission is similar institution as the European commission and believed to be the engine for integration in the Eurasian Economic Union.

The creation of single market determines united regulations for every aspects of the economy. The regulation for the classification of equipment for the manufacturing procedure of ice cream is the result of ongoing integrational process of the Eurasian Economic Union. The importance of the united regulations and classifications for single market is undeniable. In other words, the creation of single market leads to the integration of different aspects of the economy, by functional spillover effect. The functional spillover effect is the integrational process of one aspect that is caused by the integration of other aspect of economy.[29] In this case, the creation of single market leads to the creation of single custom of Eurasian Economic Union.

There is significant difference in the structure and decision making of Collegium of EEC in comparison with the European Commission. The differences can be explained by the sociological institutionalism, due to the cultural difference of the regions, there are the variation in the structure are decision making in these two institutions. However according to the neofunctionalism as integrational theory, this example of the decision emphasizes the supranational status of the instruction, and acts as the initiator of integration. Moreover, it demonstrates the ability of collegium in the policy initiation, and development of further integration, rather than Supreme Eurasian Council.

Conclusion

The EAEU is unique integrational project for post-soviet region. There were several steps of integration before the formation of the EAEU. In some sources the initial step of integration is counted as the formation of Commonwealth of Independent States. However, the Eurasian Custom Union and the Single Economic Space is accepted as foundation for further integration in the form of the EAEU. The Astana treaty which formed the EAEU limited the power of supranational institution as the EEC and removed its ability to bring the member state before court in case of non-compliance. The regional integrational project has several levels of institutions, in this case, Supreme Eurasian Council, Intergovernmental Council, Council of Eurasian Economic Commission, Collegium of Eurasian Economic Commission. The Collegium of EEC is the executive body of the institution, and its key feature is developing the managing further integrational process. This paper examined the structure, decision making, accountability, and achievement of Collegium through neofuctionalist as integrational theory, and sociological institutionalism as the governance theory. The structure of this institution is developed by the accepting the cultural features of the region, as the hegemonic status of Russian Federation, which is emphasized in form of the limitation in power of Collegium by the Council of EEC, in order to protect national interest. Moreover, the decision making of the institution also reserves the right for amendment and rejection of the right for Council of EEC, which explained by the sociological institutionalism as the cultural feature of the region. However, this paper also questioned the supranational status of Collegium of Eurasian Economic Union, which can be identified as limited supranational institution. The implementation of the act discussed in the paper emphasizes supranational status of the institution despite its power limitation by Supreme Eurasian Council, and Council of the EEC. Hence this paper concludes that the Collegium of Eurasian Economic Commission is the core integrational driver, due to its ability to implement policies on the supranational level. However, there are some significance of the regions, which can be understood form the sociological intuitionalism. In comparison with Europe, there are significant difference as the lack of democracy, and significant hegemony of a single state, which identifies the structure of the institutions, in this particular case, the collegium of EEC.

Reference

Dragneva R. and Wolczuk K. (2017). The Eurasian Economic Union Deals, Rules and the Exercise of Power. Clatham House (5). Retrieved on April 20, 2018 from https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/publications/research/2017-05-02-eurasian-economic-union-dragneva-wolczuk.pdf

Ian Bache, Stephen George and Simon Bulmer. (2011). ‘Theories of European Integration,’ in Id. Politics in the European Union. Oxford University Press.

Karliuk, M. (2015). The Eurasian Economic Union: an EU-Like Legal Order in the Post-Soviet Space? National Research University: Working Papers (53). Retrieved April 22, 2018 from http://greater-europe.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/53LAW2015.pdf

Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union – Annex 1. (2014). Commission Regulation on the Eurasian Economic Commission, Annex 1 to the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union. Retrieved on April 21, 2018 from https://docs.eaeunion.org/docs/ru-ru/0027357/itia_05062014_att.zip

Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union. (2014). Retrieved on April 21, 2018 from https://docs.eaeunion.org/docs/ru-ru/0023611/itia_05062014_doc.pdf

[1] Rilka Dragneva and Kataryna Wolczuk

[2] Rilka Dragneva and Kataryna Wolczuk

[3] Rilka Dragneva and Kataryna Wolczuk

[4] Bache 8-9

[5] Bache 8-9

[6] Bache 8

[7] Bache, 22

[8] Bache, 22-27

[9] Bache, 26

[10] Treaty on Eurasian Economic Union, 2014, 19

[11] Treaty on Eurasian Economic Union, 2014, 19

[12] Treaty on Eurasian Economic Union, Annex 1 2014, 14

[13] Treaty on Eurasian Economic Union, Annex 1 2014, 12

[14] Treaty on Eurasian Economic Union, Annex 1 2014, 12

[15] Bache, 26

[16] Bache, 26

[17] Rilka Dragneva and Kataryna Wolczuk

[18] Treaty on Eurasian Economic Union, 19

[19] Rilka Dragneva and Kataryna Wolczuk

[20] Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union – Annex 1, 2014, 15.

[21] Karliuk, 6

[22] Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union, annex 1, 2014, 16

[23] Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Uinon, annex 1, 2014, 10

[24] Treaty on the Eurasian economic Union, annex 1, 2014, 10

[25] Rilka Dragneva and Kataryna Wolczuk

[26] Rilka Dragneva and Kataryna Wolczuk

[27] Bache 9.

[28] Bache 9.

[29] Bache 8.