Conclusion and Way Forward: What Future for the Region and How We Study It?

This book critically examined the dichotomy in the literature regarding the differing influences of the EU and Russia in their shared neighbourhood. Through the development of a conceptual framework encompassing three ideal-typical mechanisms of hegemonic power (coercion, prescription, and co-optation) the study systematically compared EU and Russian neighbourhood policies in Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus. Empirical analysis of four cases (EU-Moldova, EU-Armenia, Russia-Moldova, and Russia-Armenia) highlighted the nuanced ways each power exerted influence, revealing both differences and similarities in their approaches. The study found that both the EU and Russia employed all three mechanisms, but with varying methods and effectiveness. Coercion by Russia was more unilateral and punitive, whereas the EU institutionalised its coercive measures within negotiated frameworks. In terms of prescription, the EU’s regulatory clarity contrasted with the complexity and incoherence of Russian standards within the EAEU. Co-optation efforts also differed, with Russia leveraging shared language, culture, and religion, while the EU focused on promoting European values. The analysis revealed that the legitimacy of these actions played a crucial role, with the EU generally perceived more positively than Russia, whose actions were often viewed as unpredictable and punitive. The findings also demonstrated a convergence in the hegemonic practices of the EU and Russia over time, especially post-2015, as both powers intensified their influence strategies. The study calls for future research to explore the interactive dynamics between regional hegemons and to examine how perceptions and local contexts shape power relations. It suggests extending the framework to other regions, such as Central Asia, South Asia, and Latin America, to understand the dynamics of regional hegemony in different geopolitical contexts. The insights from this research contribute to a deeper understanding of the complex interplay of hegemonic power in international relations, emphasising the importance of perceptions, legitimacy, and local contexts in shaping power dynamics.