There are two basic geo-economic and geopolitical tendencies in the world now. The first one is related to the world globalization, which transform national economies making them to enter the uniform global political and economic system, the so-called One World. The second tendency is related to regional integration intended to create an autarky of Large Space.

Both tendencies exist as a result of financial, economical and political interests of certain global forces. The globalization is directly related to the interests of international, extranational oligarchic clans controlling TNCs and using the U. S. A. as their basic strategic instrument. A transnational oligarchy determines globalization. The Autarky of Large Space corresponds with the needs of national economies-regional leaders and medium and small national economies securing their financial-economic and political self-sufficiency.

Globalization is based on the liberal division

стр. 27

of labor among different nations, which must guarantee a free exchange of commodities, resources, technologies etc. But in practice conceptions of liberalism clash with economic reality-the "inequality of structures", when the most developed economies or enormous TNCs benefit the most.

The international division of labor as the basis of globalization leads to formation of economies with a few or even only one types of production. Thus, many states become the provinces of world economy and get in total dependence on predominant power forces controlling global market.

The liberal economic model under conditions of real globalization leads to formation of a single dominating force maximally profiteering from the international division of labor and involving all states and peoples of Earth into the sphere of its economic, and therefore political influence. Under such conditions the global liberal principle of "free exchange " (secured by the WTO) not only preserves economic inequality but also deepens and makes it absolute. The leadership issues will be determined not only by economic preconditions but also by political and power, military factors.

Taking into account the role of the United States in the world trade and international division of labor sanctioned by transnational oligarchic clans, there is no doubt that the globalization is to a great extent the sphere of influence and control of the USA which due to the geopolitical, historical and cultural circumstances were able to most effectively satisfy its own interests at the expense of other countries.

Besides the globalization of financial and economical and military-political

processes, this American-style One World globalizes financial and economical and military-political crises as well. Political and economic atmospherics in the U. S. A. destabilize dependent economies.

This important factor caused the necessity of an alternative to globalization (autarkies of Large Spaces), which includes both certain economic and political organization of regional economies in a systemic structure. There is an example of the EU.

The economy of Large Space with all elements of economic self-sufficiency and independence is not a fully closed regional economic system. There remains an open possibility of trading with other Large Spaces. However, a monopoly should be established on vitally important products. The primary objectives of the autarky of Large Space are as follows:

1. The need for a state to be maximally independent from commodities, productions and minerals, which are beyond its control;

2. The need to maximally diversify output and balance national economy. Such diversification will allow increasing national welfare and strengthening the state. It is often a temporary policy, but then it may last indefinitely;

3. The desire to plan public economy regardless of the state of world economy. The autarky becomes a policy here that assumes at least - "economic insula-rism", if not economic isolation.

J. Fichte and F. Liszt were the main theorists of the autarky and economy of Large Spaces. Stephen Fadinger wrote that Liszt opposed international integration, and especially against the English doctrine of free exchange, against economic

стр. 28

liberalism suggested by Adam Smith. Liszt saw in this ideology the camouflaged imperialism oriented to market control under the slogan of "liberty" ("free trade"). Liszt promoced national industry and protectionism. These barriers as a temporal measure were intended to develop a priority branch of economy ensuring normal progress of a Nation. Unlike Smith, Liszt did not acknowledge any such thing as an independent economy. He thought that economy is only an instrument for people, otherwise it would become a dominant element in society, and the "freedom" for ones would mean exploitation and slavery for other.

Today Liszt's theory is evolved by German economist Dieter Senghaas, which maintains that dominant ideology of the West purposefully imposes the globalization on the world and makes Latin America, Asia and Africa to take part in the international division of labor beneficial for foreign centers. Using as a cover such dear words "freedom", "integration", "cooperation", the TNCs create this One World system. Under pressure of ideologically motivated economic doctrines peoples and states are made to pass from the inflorescence of national economies to cultivation of monocultures, which fail to make adequate provision even for their own people and are to depend upon foreign financial-industrial consortia. Practically all national economies undergo "structural deformations ". "Economic cycles" come apart.

Dieter Senghaas maintains: "Beyond any doubt the theory of Liszt is workable today and will remain such, while the masses of peripheral societies rebel against the System, against this international economic order catered by their own

economic and political "elites" which sold themselves to the foreigners.

Known economist John Keynes in the 30s formulated more moderate conception of "autarky" and named it the "theory of economic insulation". He, in particular, wrote that he thought that national independence in the matters of economy and national isolation should be greater, than before 1914.

Such conceptions, as "autarky of Large Spaces" or "economic insulation", arise from the basic idea of "economic nationalism" which is intended to maintain the independence of the nation. Substantially "economic nationalism" is a doctrine which aspires not to make the nation richer, but to make it freer, not so prosperous, as independent. Economic nationalism is the national policy of self-sufficiency.

William Rappard maintains that "economic nationalism"

* tries to limit the consumption by the products and commodities produced by the Earth's interior and domestic labor. Appeals to nationalism, energetic and decisive manipulation with tariffs, carefully thought out taxation, control of barter and direct prohibition of commercial activity are used to force nation to be satisfied with domestic products and to give up consumption of foreign ones;

* economic nationalism tries to develop domestic production of essential commodities and products;

* economic nationalism aspires to expand its influence going across the border;

* taking into account actual situation and admitting that no import limitations, no backing of national output and no territorial expansion can make the

стр. 29

state fully self-sufficient, economic nationalism tries to get advantageous balance of payments on all international agreements, increasing inflow of gold.

Economic nationalism postulating the economy of Large Spaces cannot be based on economic and material criteria only, as it liberals prefer. Its usefulness should be evaluated in a wider historical and political context. It embodies the natural right of every people to express its independent political will supported by economic foundation.

Economic nationalism arises from the conception of communal ownership, "communotarism " that is the exact opposite of individualism, which is based on the liberal model of economy and society. The term "communotarism" stipulates that it is impossible to ignore common interests of all people; it is impossible to ignore the interests of a WHOLE. The different parts of the society (Whole) should be balance; it is impossible to allow that somebody prospers at the expense of somebody else, even if it is required by the logic of income and economic efficiency.

* * *

The objective geo-economic reasons push Ukraine and Russia to create a common autarky of Large Space on the basis of economic nationalism. The main incentive is that their products cannot be competitive on the world market.

Such categorical judgment is related to the natural and climatic features of their territories: low annual average temperature. No major industrial region in the world has average winter temperatures below zero because the producer needs

maximal energy saving. It brings down unit cost and brings up its competitiveness. The mechanism of globalization permits industrial countries to carry production over to the regions with minimum power inputs.

Production under natural and climatic conditions of Ukraine, and even more so of Russia, are exceedingly power consuming. Economic and civil infrastructures demand massive financial input under low-temperature conditions. As a result the prime price of Ukrainian and Russian products is higher, than in other industrial regions of world. For this reason Ukraine fails to attract the EU investments. To a greater degree it is true for the Russian Federation.

The production cost apportionment analysis shows that Ukraine and Russian Federation lose to almost all countries of the world. Both production and living here requires more energy. Therefore their products are more expensive and uncompetitive.

These conditions lead to two main consequences:

* Ukrainian and Russian industrial quality products similar to their foreign analogs have higher prime price and are unprofitable during realization;

* the enterprises of Ukraine and Russian Federation are unattractive on the foreign investments market while foreign capital markets are more attractive for domestic investors.

For this reason western investments ignore Ukrainian and Russian economies. And it isn't the matter of democratic and openness of Ukraine or Russia. It isn't simply feasible.

The same explains the fact that in Ukraine they place money in trade, food

стр. 30

industry and energy resources. In this case they finance the transit of Russian energy resources (plus shipping them by rail in the west-east-west direction); it results in the major privatization of the food production branch and ultimate energy supply as the most profitable industries. Meanwhile, the strategic profitable and risk-free elements of national economy (on which national security depends) remain beyond public control. Other sectors of Ukrainian (as well as Russian) economy will get no investments, because this is not lucrative for the West.

For the same reason integration into the world economy is mortally dangerous for Ukrainian and Russian industry. Firstly, migration of capital will legally permit the cross-border outflow of capital (it will be taken to the maximal profit projects). Secondly, free migration of commodities will "kill" those branches of national industry, which are still marketable inside the country and protected so far by custom barriers. Thirdly, the integration into the world economy is impossible without reconciliation of domestic and foreign electric power and gas tariffs (year and year out Ukraine has been pressing the IMF for it). It will push the electric power tariff up to " 12-15 per kWh and higher. It may finally ruin Ukrainian economy, knock down transport and depopulate urban settlements in Ukraine incapable to pay for power consumption.

It is a copybook truth: what is useful for the world economy, not necessarily must be advantageous for Ukraine or Russia. WE NEED OUR OWN WAY OF DEVELOPMENT, instead of mimicking someone.

The main conclusion is that economic reforms based on foreign investments in Ukraine and Russia are doomed to failure, and entry of these countries into the world economy will completely ruin their economic and social infrastructures. The only way out from the socio-economic collapse of both countries is in their financial and economic isolation within the framework of the common autarky of Large Space together with implementation of reform based on economic nationalism.

If there are objective reasons why we cannot play by the rules of the world market, we must create our own common market of the "Large Space" of autarky and our own game directives. They should be based upon two main truths:

* industrial society on the territory of our countries will always be forced to rely only on the national capital and materialized labor of previous generations and material resources accumulated by them;

* our national economy will always be uncompetitive with the world one.

These truths form the primary objective of autarky: creation of necessary conditions for the autarky countries common market. Obviously, common security and defense will also be needed.

There are all conditions for the autarky of Large Space, which will integrate and protect Ukraine and Russia. It needs only a detailed project and political will. The countries of Europe may serve a good example of going towards their future aim with the help of expansion of their autarky of Large Space.

Постоянный адрес данной публикации: