by Oleg Maslov

A magnificent project to unite the Eurasian continent in a web of pipelines, high speed rail, fiber optic cables, highways, and trade agreements from Lisbon to Singapore is already under construction and, should this project succeed, it will change the lives of everyone living in between and have profound implications on global geopolitics. Mostly initiated and driven forward by the economic might of China, the New Silk Road promises to bring cheap goods, cheap energy, new businesses and potentially hundreds of millions of jobs – essentially promising to deliver peace through prosperity for the largest landmass and the largest collection of people, cultures and natural resources on earth.

The ancient trade routes of Marco Polo which brought the silk and spices of Asia to Europe eventually fell out of favor with merchants largely due to the increased speed and security offered by the sea route, driven by rapid advances in maritime science and industry. Those who controlled the seas, a role played by Europe in the last 500 years and by the USA especially in the last 70, controlled global trade and made the world play by their rules, preventing other nations from using sea routes with their superior naval technology, thus effectively controlling income and development of the victim nation to their own benefit, making the victim nation bow to their demands. However, technology improvement in overland travel and current geopolitical security realities have rekindled hopes in the economic viability of the overland route, called the New Silk Road, as a competitor to the sea routes controlled by the US Navy.

The ancient overland route traveled from the Chinese Pacific coast to the Mediterranean and on to Europe, running underneath the Caspian Sea and through Iran and the Middle East, but another, more northerly route exists. The Northern Route moves through Kazakhstan and Russia and goes to Northern Europe through Belarus and to Central Europe and the Balkans through Ukraine. Serious geopolitical challenges such as the Islamic State, Central Asian radical movements, and the Taliban along with the jostle between Turkey, Iran, and the Gulf States for domination of the region bring huge transit risks to overland operations, and will do so for the foreseeable future, which means the stability of the Northern Route holds more promise in the near term. Major railway and pipeline projects between Russia and China have already started the process of developing the Northern Route and China has already begun to sign transit agreements with European countries such as Hungary.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has laid out Russia’s future strategy numerous times. In echoes of proposals from former French President Chirac and former German Chancellor Schroeder, Putin has reiterated the desire to see a common economic space from London to Vladivostock. China’s regional integration plans would expand this economic zone all the way to Singapore, uniting the entire Eurasian landmass in a series of agreements. Russia has already made significant process in bridging the differences with China, but efforts to further integrate Russia and Europe with trade arrangements have failed so far. Although Russia has significantly higher GDP, standards of living, lower debt, and better finances than many other countries admitted into the European Union, great resistance exists to Russia joining the EU, perhaps because of the fear that Russia, based on its military might, natural resources, and population, will dominate the bloc. All sorts of efforts, including the Third Energy Package, have been implemented to slow the inevitable linking of Russia with Europe. I say inevitable because the alternative is unthinkable – war on the European continent once again. Future relationships between Europe and Russia can take one of two forms, either negotiated partnership as equals or domination by force or subterfuge, and, by now, everyone knows that Russia will not bow.

This brings us to the current topic of Ukraine, a land right in the middle of one of the most important trade routes on Earth that has suddenly been swept up in national conflict. At the core of this conflict is what is presented as a civilizational choice – either to side with Europe through the Association Agreement or to side with Russia and the Eurasian Union project. People in Ukraine have clearly become tired of rampant systemic corruption regardless of which party comes to power and many have a close feeling of “Europeanness” and the craving of the European standard of living, therefore openly rejecting economic relations with Russia, while business, family, and cultural links tie other people in Ukraine closer to Russia. Ukraine is becoming the new meeting point between the European and the Russian world, a role served by the Berlin Wall in earlier times. However, instead of a wall, the best interests of Ukraine are to serve as a bridge between the two, and the best way for this to happen is to give Ukraine membership in both organizations – the choice of either/or is inherently a false dichotomy.

Ukraine has the unique opportunity to serve as a key bridge between Europe and Russia and as a key hub on the New Silk Road, and this opportunity could bring untold wealth to Ukraine while solving the internal conflict at the same time. Those in Ukraine arguing for a European future would have EU membership, EU visas, EU regulations, and EU oversight to tackle the corruption while Ukrainians with close ties to Russia would be able to keep their traditional business links and have the opportunity to build new business around a liberalization of trade flowing to both ends of Eurasia – both the financial and civilizational problems of Ukraine would be addressed. Negotiations between the EU and the EEU centered on the role of Ukraine could serve as a model for other countries to follow, such as Belarus and Moldova, and would open the entire ‘World Island’ for business and peace through prosperity and trade security.

I was born in Kursk, the site of the world’s largest tank battle between the Soviet Union and Germany, a clash between Europe and the Russian world. My family moved to the United States when I was just five years old and I attended American public school and university and learned the American version of World War II, or the Great Patriotic War as it’s known in Russia. Not until I was older did I investigate the role of my ancestors in this conflict. I discovered that Soviet people bore the brunt of the Nazi war machine and that my own great grandfather marched in Berlin and participated in taking the Reichstag. Then, I moved to Berlin and worked right near the heart of the division between East and West, the Berlin Wall. One of the most frequent questions that my Berlin connections ask is whether I feel Russian or American. For a long time, this question was very difficult for me to answer, I felt parts of both inside of me and always attempted to find a compromise answer that would encapsulate my ideas, referring to myself as a ‘hybrid’ or ‘cosmopolitan’.

The Ukrainian political movement to build closer ties with Europe gained steam over the past decade, but the voices advocating this position have always claimed, counter to Ukraine’s history, that this movement is mutually exclusive with Russian ties. Although building a bridge between Russia and Europe will certainly require thorough negotiation, it is far from impossible and could bring untold benefits to Ukraine. Choosing one side with the exclusion of the other is not only a loss of revenue and business, it creates an existential threat to the unified existence of Ukraine as a nation. Choosing one direction over another is blatantly against the national interests of Ukraine, while the idea of acting as a bridge to connect these two civilizations and to connect with Asia can be a national ideology of peace and prosperity that can unite the Ukrainian people and bring the planet on a course to a multi-polar world of respect for other cultures and peaceful coexistence on the Eurasian continent.

Although much blood has been spilt and hatred runs deep on either side, the opportunity still exists for the creation of a Ukrainian political movement centered on the idea of Ukraine as a bridge between Europe and Russia, with respect for the will of the people on both sides of the divide. The opportunity exists for Ukrainians to seize the prosperity they deserve and to play a key role in one of the most important projects in the future of humanity, the New Silk Road. Many problems and barriers exist to the implementation of this divide, especially the idea of the superiority of one nation, people, or genetic makeup over another. National Socialism in Germany was driven in large part by the idea of the superiority of the Aryan race, forgetting that civilizations in Egypt, the Middle East, and India were thousands of years old while Europe was populated with ‘barbarians’. While many have tried to justify the results of the Great Patriotic war with different arguments, the baffling triumph of backward eastern ‘Untermenschen’ against the Nazi war machine of the ‘advanced’ Aryans proved the falsehood of these ideas and that the future must be built on new ideas of mutual respect.

One more important barricade to the successful completion of the New Silk Road is that any sizable shift to overland routes in trade between Europe and Asia necessarily means a decline in the role and power of those who guarantee the security of trade over the seas. Most certainly, these powers have much to lose and will do all in their power to prevent this change from happening, using all tools at their disposal, including military means, to prevent this integration. The objections of these powers must also be met with negotiations and mutually beneficial agreements.

The current moment, the current conflict is a key fork in the road in the history of planet earth. The people should have the ultimate right to decide their political and economic future for the best interest of all citizens. A historic opportunity exists to connect Eurasia from Lisbon to Singapore in a web of infrastructure and treaties that will bring peace and prosperity and link different cultures together with mutually beneficial trade agreements. The process begins with a conversation. Will membership in both organizations satisfy Ukrainians on both sides of the argument? Are the EU and the Eurasian Union able to find enough common ground in Ukraine to make the ends meet? I urge a start to negotiations and public dialogue because the stakes could not be higher. If we miss this chance, if we fail to build bridges and choose to build walls instead, the future will certainly take a much different and much darker course, for the only real alternative to peace is war.