Comparative analysis of the CSTO, EPDS: use of the experience of the European integration
to the integration studies in the post-Soviet territory.


	National Security Reference: Zaripova, A.T. (2011). Comparative analysis of the CSTO, EPDS: use of the experience of the European integration to the integration studies in the post-Soviet territory. National Security, 3, 122–131. https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=58386 Zaripova, A.T. Comparative analysis of the CSTO, EPDS: use of the experience of the European integration to the integration studies in the post-Soviet territory. Abstract: This publication was provided as a part of the dissertation thesis for the study of the European Policy in Defence and Security (EPDS), and it is aimed to provide understanding of why a military block, which was formed in the post-Soviet territory (CSTO), while being theoretically similar to the EDPS, is much less effi cient. In order to respond to this question, the author analyzes possible application of the theory of European integration in the CIS, then the author comes to the conclusion, that while looking different, these two formation face similar problems and they can be analyzed with the help of similar integration theories. Keywords: political science, the EU, the CIS, the European security, the theories of integration, the EPDS, the CSTO, the national security, security blocks. This article is unavailable for unregistered users. Click to login or register References 1. Bono G. European Security and Defense Policy: theoretical approaches, the Nice summit and hot issues. 2002. 2. / http://www.bits.de/CESD-PA/esdp02.pdf. 3. Cummings S. Introduction: Power and change in Central Asia.// Cummings S. Power and change in Central 4. Asia. London, 2002. S. 1-24. 5. Glarbo K. Reconstructing a Common European Foreign Policy.//Christiansen T., Jørgensen K. and Wiener A. 6. (eds), The Social Construction of Europe. London, 2001. C. 242. 7. Gleason G. The Central Asian States: Discovering Independence. Boulder, 1997. C. 150. 8. Hoffman S. Obstinate or obsolete? / Brent, F. and Stubb A. (eds.). The European Union: Readings on the theory 9. and practice of European Integration. N.Y., 2003. C. 163-177. 10. Jonson L. Vladimir Putin and Central Asia. N.Y. 2004. C. 304. 11. Moravcsik A. Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics. //International 12. Organization. №51 (4), 1997. S. 513-553. 13. Pursianen K. Russian Foreign Policy and International Relations History. Hampshire, 2000. S. 239. 14. Tsygankov A. Russia’s foreign policy. Change and continuity in national identity. N.Y., 2006. C. 244. 15. Gavrilov Yu., Kuz'min V., Falaleev M. Summa sil. / Rossiyskaya gazeta №4842 ot 05.02.2009. / http:// 16. www.rg.ru/2009/02/05/armiya.html. 17. Muradyan I. Politicheskaya sud'ba ODKB. 2010 / http://geopolitica.ru/Articles/1085/. 18. Nikolaenko V.D. Kollektivnaya bezopasnost' Rossii i ee soyuzniki. M.: Al'ba. 2003. S.176. 19. Poletaev V. Dogovoru – 15 let.//Rossiyskaya gazeta. Federal'nyy vypusk №4363 ot 15 maya 2007 goda./ 20. http://www.rg.ru/2007/05/15/odkb.html 21. Solov'ev V. Organizatsiya Antinatovskogo Dogovora. / Kommersant №160 ot 06.09.2008 / http://www. 22. kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=1022544.

Journals

Books

Zaripova, A.T. Comparative analysis of the CSTO, EPDS: use of the experience of the European integration to the integration studies in the post-Soviet territory.