欧洲一体化与乌克兰的道路选择

European Integration and Ukraine's Choice

二战后,欧洲地区出现了三种不同形态的一体化,因驱动力不同,其一体化结果也各不相同。经互会是政治驱动,在苏东剧变后"寿终正寝"。欧自联是贸易驱动的一体化,虽然不断遭到欧盟的蚕食,但由于其平台的开放性,故依然具有活力。而欧共体的一体化则是政治加贸易驱动的一体化,成员国在不断扩大,同时一体化的程度也在不断加深。相比之下,苏联解体后产生的独联体,在一体化方面延续了政治驱动的势头,又注重安全一体化,而经济一体化起步较晚,耽误了发展的时机。对于乌克兰来说,地缘政治平衡是最好的选择,但随着时间的推移,经济发展不顺,独联体经济一体化又止步不前,对外经济关系的天平开始向欧盟倾斜。而欧盟对东部邻国政策的不断调整,最终促成乌克兰选择了欧洲经济一体化,也引爆了乌克兰危机。在乌克兰经济社会发展道路选择上,欧盟软实力的吸引力胜过了俄罗斯的硬实力。

This paper starts with an analysis of the three formats of integration emerged in Europe after the Second World War,showing that different driving forces could produce different results. The COMECON which was created mainly out of political reasons was dissolved after the collapse of the Soviet Union. In contrast,due to its openness,the EFTA,motivated originally by trade promotion,still keeps its vitality despite the continuous encroachment of its market by the EU. At last,the EU,an organization targeted at both political and economic aims,has been undergoing continuous expanding and deepening. In comparison,the CIS established after the collapse of the USSR follows the COMECON pattern,prioritizing security over economic integration. As regards Ukraine,to keep geopolitical balance of power is most favourable to its development. However,the economic setbacks and the delayed CIS economic integration forced Ukraine to put an emphasis on its external economic relations with the EU. The EU's constant adjustment of its eastern neighbourhood policy had finally led to Ukraine's choice of the European economic integration as its development path,which triggered the Ukraine Crisis. In the sense of Ukraine's choice of its economic and social development path,the EU's soft power has gained upper hand over Russia's hard power.