On post-Soviet space Economic integration is fraught with significant contradictions and difficulties. Many political decisions taken on various aspects of integration in the CIS could not, due to objective reasons, stimulate integration processes. The contribution of the CIS to streamlining the demarcation of the former Soviet republics and preventing deep geopolitical upheavals during the collapse of the USSR cannot be underestimated. However, due to serious differences in the levels of development of economies, methods of managing them, the pace and forms of transition from a planned to a market economy and the action of a number of other factors, including the different geopolitical and foreign economic orientation of the countries of the former USSR, their fear of dependence on Russia, bureaucracy and nationalism, Since the middle of the last decade, economic integration in the post-Soviet space has taken on a multi-format and multi-speed character, which was reflected in the creation within the CIS of several integration groupings, more limited in the number of participants and the depth of interaction.

Currently, the CIS is regional organization, the prospects for the evolution of which towards an integration unification are assessed in the dissertation as rather unfavorable. The work notes that within the Commonwealth there is a tendency to separate the Asian and European blocks of the CIS, along with increased interaction between the countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus, which casts doubt on the preservation of the integrity of this organization in the long term.

Integration initiatives in the region are being undertaken within the framework of more local entities of post-Soviet states. Thus, a significantly narrower association than the CIS is the Eurasian Economic Community - EurAsEC (Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan), created in 2000, which is still at the initial stage of integration. The desire of the political elites of the Community member countries to speed up the transition to a higher level of integration interaction within the EurAsEC is manifested in the declaration of the creation of a customs union by the end of 2007 by three members of the Community (Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus).

The creation in 1999 of the Union State of Russia and Belarus (USRB) was aimed at deepening the division of labor and cooperation ties between these countries in various sectors of the national economy, the abolition of customs barriers, the convergence of national legislation in the field of regulating the activities of economic entities, etc. In some areas of cooperation, in particular, in the field of development of cooperation ties and liberalization of trade regimes, certain positive results have been achieved. Unfortunately, in the field of trade interaction, countries often apply exemptions from the free trade regime, and the introduction of a common customs tariff is not coordinated. Agreements on the unification of energy and transport systems have been seriously tested in connection with the situation in the field of Russian gas supplies to Belarus and its transportation to EU countries through its territory. The transition to a single currency, planned since 2005, was not realized, in particular, due to the unresolved issues of a single emission center and the degree of independence of the central banks of both countries in conducting monetary policy.

The economic integration of the two countries is largely hampered by the unresolved conceptual issues of building the Union State. Russia and Belarus have still not reached agreement on the model of unification. The adoption of the Constitutional Act, originally scheduled for 2003, has been constantly delayed due to serious disagreements between partner countries. The main reason for disagreement is the reluctance of countries to give up their sovereignty in favor of the Union State, without which real integration in the highest, most developed forms is impossible. Further integration of the SGRB towards an economic and monetary union is also constrained by the varying degrees of maturity of market economies and democratic institutions civil society in the Russian Federation and Belarus.

An important condition The development of integration cooperation between Russia and Belarus is a balanced, pragmatic approach to interaction between the two states, based on taking into account the real capabilities and national interests of both countries. A balance of national interests can only be achieved in the process of progressive development of integration of the two economies based on market principles. Therefore, it seems inappropriate to artificially speed up the integration process.

A new stage in the search for effective mutually beneficial integration forms and harmonization of relations between the Commonwealth countries was the signing by Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine of an agreement on the formation of a common economic space (SES) for the free movement of goods, services, capital and labor. The legal formalization of this agreement took place at the end of 2003.

There are real prerequisites for the integration of the “four” economies: these countries account for the overwhelming majority of the economic potential of the countries of the post-Soviet space (Russia’s share is 82% of total GDP, 78% of industrial output, 79% of investments in fixed capital); 80% of foreign trade turnover in the CIS; a common huge Eurasian massif connected by a single transport system; predominantly Slavic population; convenient access to foreign markets; community of historical and cultural heritage and many others common features and benefits that create real preconditions for effective economic integration.

However, the priority of the European Union in Ukraine's integration policy significantly slows down the process of implementing the project for the formation of the SES-4. A serious factor hindering the development economic relations Russia and Ukraine, is the inconsistency of the terms and conditions for each of them to join the WTO. Ukraine demonstrates its interest in creating a free trade zone and its fundamental unpreparedness to participate in the formation of a customs union in the Common Economic Space. Political instability in Ukraine is also an obstacle to the implementation of this integration project.

The dissertation also notes that the post-Soviet space is becoming a zone of intense international competition for spheres of influence, where Russia does not act as an undisputed leader, but, along with the USA, EU, China, is only one of the political centers of power and economic players, and far from being the most influential. Analysis current state and trends in the evolution of integration groups in the post-Soviet space shows that its configuration

is determined by the confrontation of both centripetal and centrifugal forces.

After the collapse of the USSR in December 1991, an agreement was signed to create the Commonwealth of Independent States, which included 12 former Soviet republics: Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan (not only Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were included). It was meant that the CIS would make it possible to maintain and deepen economic ties between the former republics of the USSR. The process of formation and development of the CIS took place very dynamically, but not without problems.

The CIS countries collectively have the richest natural and economic potential, an extensive market, which gives them significant competitive advantages and allows them to take their rightful place in the international division of labor. They have 16.3% of the world's territory, 5% of the population, 25% of reserves natural resources, 10% industrial production, 12% scientific and technical potential, 10% resource-generating goods. Until recently, the efficiency of transport and communication systems in the CIS was several times higher than in the USA and China. An important advantage is geographical position The CIS, through which the shortest land and sea (via the Arctic Ocean) route from Europe to Southeast Asia passes. According to World Bank estimates, income from the operation of the Commonwealth's transport and communication systems could amount to $100 billion. Other competitive resources of the CIS countries - cheap labor and energy resources - create potential conditions for economic recovery. 10% of the world's electricity is produced here (the fourth place in the world in terms of its production).

Integration trends in the post-Soviet space are generated by the following main factors:

division of labor, which could not be completely changed in a short period of time. In many cases, this is generally impractical, since the existing division of labor largely corresponded to the natural, climatic and historical conditions of development;

the desire of the broad masses of the population in the CIS member countries to maintain fairly close ties due to the mixed population, mixed marriages, elements of a common cultural space, the absence of a language barrier, interest in the free movement of people, etc.;

technological interdependence, uniform technical standards.

During the existence of the Commonwealth, about a thousand joint decisions were made in the CIS bodies in various areas of cooperation. Economic integration is expressed in the formation of interstate associations from CIS member countries. The dynamics of development are presented as follows:

Ø Agreement on the creation of an Economic Union, which included all CIS countries, with the exception of Ukraine (September 1993);

Ø Agreement on the creation of a free trade zone, signed by all CIS member countries (April 1994);

Ø Agreement on the creation of the Customs Union, which by 2001 included 5 CIS countries: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan (January 1995);

Ø Treaty on the Union of Belarus and Russia (April 1997);

Ø Treaty on the creation of the Union State of Russia and Belarus (December 1999);

Ø Treaty establishing the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC), which included Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan, designed to replace the Customs Union (October 2000);

Ø Agreement on the formation of the Common Economic Space (SES) of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Ukraine (September 2003).

Along the paths of independent and separate economic management, subregional political alliances and economic groupings arose, caused by a multi-vector foreign strategy. Today, the following integration associations exist in the CIS:

1. Union State of Belarus and Russia (USBR);

2. Euro-Asian Economic Community (EurAsEC): Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan;

3. Common Economic Space (SES): Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan;

4. Central Asian Cooperation (CAC): Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan.

5. Unification of Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Moldova (GUUAM);

PROBLEMS:

Firstly, a serious barrier to the formation of a single economic space was the deep difference in the economic situation in individual CIS countries. Variety of important macro economic indicators was obvious evidence of the deep demarcation of the post-Soviet republics, the disintegration of the previously common national economic complex.

Secondly, economic factors that do not contribute to the development of integration processes in the post-Soviet space include, of course, differences in the implementation of economic reforms. In many countries, there are different speeds of movement towards the market; market transformations are far from complete, which hinders the formation of a single market space.

Thirdly, the most important factor hindering the rapid development of integration processes within the CIS is political. It is the political and separatist ambitions of the ruling national elites, their subjective interests that do not allow creating favorable conditions for the functioning of enterprises in a single inter-country space different countries Commonwealth.

Fourthly, leading world powers, which have long been accustomed to adhering to double standards, play an important role in slowing down integration processes in the post-Soviet space. At home, in the West, they encourage the further expansion and strengthening of such integration groups as the EU and NAFTA, but with regard to the CIS countries they take the exact opposite position. Western powers are not really interested in the emergence of a new integration group in the CIS that will compete with them on world markets.

Transition of new independent states from command and distribution to market economy determined the impossibility or economic inexpediency of preserving in the new conditions formed in former USSR mutual economic relations. In contrast to Western European states, which began integration rapprochement in the mid-50s, the technical and economic level of production of the Commonwealth countries, which are members of regional groupings together with Russia, remains at a low level (low in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan). These states do not have a developed manufacturing industry (especially high-tech industries), which, as is known, has an increased ability to connect the economies of partner countries on the basis of deepening specialization and cooperation of production and is the basis for the real integration of national economies.

The already completed accession of a number of CIS countries to the WTO (Armenia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan and Moldova) or the negotiations on accession to this organization that are not synchronized with other partners (Ukraine) also do not contribute to the economic rapprochement of the former union republics. Coordination of the level of customs duties primarily with the WTO, and not with partners from the Commonwealth, significantly complicates the creation of a customs union and a common economic space in the CIS region.

The most negative consequences for market reforms in the CIS member states is that not a single one of the newly formed market institutions has become an instrument for the structural and technological restructuring of production, a “fulcrum” crisis management, a lever for mobilizing real capital. They also did not create favorable conditions for actively attracting foreign direct investment. Thus, in almost all countries of the Commonwealth, during the reforms it was not possible to completely solve the problems of the initially planned economic transformations.

Problems remain with stimulating small and medium-sized businesses, creating a competitive environment and an effective mechanism for private investment activity. During privatization, the institution of “effective owners” did not emerge. The outflow of domestic capital outside the CIS continues. The state of national currencies is unstable and prone to dangerous exchange rate fluctuations that increase inflation. None of the Commonwealth countries has developed an effective system of state support and protection of national producers in the domestic and foreign markets. The non-payment crisis has not been overcome. To these problems, the financial crisis of 1998 added the devaluation of a number of national currencies, a downgrade of credit ratings, the flight of portfolio investors (especially from Russia and Ukraine), a weakening inflow of foreign direct investment, and the loss of some promising foreign markets.

PROSPECTS

Based on the accumulated experience of integration, taking into account the inertia of integration processes, this development, as before, will occur through the conclusion of multilateral and bilateral agreements. The experience of implementing bilateral agreements has shown the difficulty of resolving all problematic issues in the field of trade and economic relations between all member states of the CIS Economic Union. The practice of concluding agreements between ZEiM OJSC and its foreign counterparties is typical. Each country has its own standard agreement. There is the practice of bilateral agreements on the purchase of Russian products. At the same time, it is possible and advisable to use a different model of evolution. We are talking about the transition from multi-speed integration to differentiated integration of states.

Thus, first, complementary states must integrate, and then the remaining countries should gradually and on a voluntary basis join the free trade zone formed by them, expanding the radius of its action. The duration of such an integration process will largely depend on the formation of an appropriate public consciousness in all CIS countries.

The main principles of the new strategy are pragmatism, alignment of interests, mutually beneficial respect for the political sovereignty of states.

The main strategic guideline is the creation of a free trade zone (by opening national borders to the movement of goods, services, labor and capital) - free enough to take into account the interests and ensure the sovereignty of states. The most relevant areas of activity to create a free trade zone include the following.

Determination of agreed upon, maximally universal and transparent goals and means of economic integration of the CIS republics based on the interests of each of them and the Commonwealth as a whole.

Improving tariff policy to ensure fair competition in national markets. Removal of unreasonable restrictions in mutual trade and full implementation of the principle of levying indirect taxes “according to the country of destination”, generally accepted in world practice.

Coordination and harmonization of joint actions of the CIS countries on issues related to their accession to the WTO.

Modernization legal framework economic cooperation, including bringing it into line with European and world standards, convergence of national customs, tax, civil, and immigration laws. Model laws of the Interparliamentary Assembly should become a means of harmonizing national legislation.

Creation of an effective negotiation and consultative mechanism and tools for making, executing, and monitoring decisions for the prompt implementation of multilateral cooperation and taking into account the positions of the CIS states.

Development of common scientific and technical priorities and standards, directions for joint development of innovative and information technologies and measures to accelerate investment cooperation, as well as drawing up macroeconomic forecasts for the development of the CIS.

Formation of a multilateral payment system, designed to: a) help reduce the costs of trade operations between the countries of the Commonwealth; b) ensure the use of appropriate national currencies.

The main one of these areas is the high degree of interdependence of the economies of the CIS countries, the potential of which can be effectively used only in conditions of joint well-coordinated work. The technological commonality of production, based on close cooperative ties between many enterprises, and common transport communications are also preserved.

In any case, the three most important tasks of the integrating countries must initially be solved: the consistent formation of a single information, a single legal, and a single economic space. The first is understood as providing the necessary conditions for the unhindered and prompt exchange of information, access to it by all subjects economic activity with sufficient homogeneity, comparability and reliability of the data. Firstly, there is a need for economic information required for decision-making at various levels, and secondly, coordination and unification of legal norms for entrepreneurial and economic activity in general. Thus, prerequisites will arise for the creation of a single economic space, which presupposes the unhindered implementation of economic transactions, the possibility of free choice by subjects of world economic relations, preferred options and forms. Of course, common information, legal and economic spaces should be based on the principles of voluntariness, mutual assistance, economic mutual benefit, legal guarantees and responsibility for accepted obligations. The initial basis for integration development is respect for the sovereignty and protection of the national interests of countries, ensuring their international and national economic security.

Integration trends in the post-Soviet space are generated by the following main factors:

A division of labor that could not be completely changed in a short period of time. In many cases, this is generally impractical, since the existing division of labor largely corresponded to the natural, climatic and historical conditions of development;

The desire of the broad masses of the population in the CIS member countries to maintain fairly close ties due to the mixed population, mixed marriages, elements of a common cultural space, the absence of a language barrier, interest in the free movement of people, etc.;

Technological interdependence, common technical standards.

Despite this, tendencies towards disengagement clearly prevailed in the first year of the Commonwealth's functioning. There was a massive break in traditional economic ties; administrative and economic barriers, tariff and non-tariff restrictions were erected on the routes of trade flows; Failure to fulfill obligations accepted at the state and grassroots levels has become widespread.

During the existence of the Commonwealth, about a thousand joint decisions were made in the CIS bodies in various areas of cooperation. Economic integration is expressed in the formation of interstate associations from CIS member countries. The dynamics of development are presented as follows:

Ø Agreement on the creation of an Economic Union, which included all CIS countries, with the exception of Ukraine (September 1993);

Ø Agreement on the creation of a free trade zone, signed by all CIS member countries (April 1994);

Ø Agreement on the creation of the Customs Union, which by 2001 included 5 CIS countries: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan (January 1995);

Ø Treaty on the Union of Belarus and Russia (April 1997);

Ø Treaty on the creation of the Union State of Russia and Belarus (December 1999);

Ø Treaty establishing the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC), which included Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan, designed to replace the Customs Union (October 2000);

Ø Agreement on the formation of the Common Economic Space (SES) of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Ukraine (September 2003).

However, these and many other decisions remained on paper, and the potential for interaction has so far been unclaimed. Statistics confirm that legal mechanisms have not become effective and sufficient for the integration of the economies of the CIS countries. And if in 1990 the share of mutual supplies of 12 CIS countries exceeded 70% of the total value of their exports, then in 1995 it amounted to 55%, and in 2003 – less than 40%. At the same time, the share of highly processed goods is primarily reduced. At the same time, in the EU the share of domestic trade in total exports exceeds 60%, in NAFTA - 45%.

The processes of integration in the CIS are affected by the different degrees of preparedness of its member countries and different approaches in them to carry out radical economic transformations, the desire to find their own path (Uzbekistan, Ukraine), take on the role of a leader (Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan), avoid participating in a difficult treaty process (Turkmenistan), receive military-political support (Tajikistan) , solve their internal problems (Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia) at the expense of the Commonwealth.

At the same time, each state independently based on priorities internal development and international obligations determines the form and scope of its participation in the Commonwealth and in the work of its general bodies in order to use it to the maximum extent in the interests of strengthening its geopolitical and economic positions. The main obstacle to successful integration was the lack of an agreed upon goal and consistency of integration actions, as well as the lack of political will to achieve progress. Some of the ruling circles of the new states still have hopes of obtaining benefits by distancing themselves from Russia and integrating within the CIS.

Along the paths of independent and separate economic management, subregional political alliances and economic groupings arose, caused by a multi-vector foreign strategy. Today, the following integration associations exist in the CIS:

1. Union State of Belarus and Russia (USBR);

2. Euro-Asian Economic Community (EurAsEC): Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan;

3. Common Economic Space (SES): Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan;

4. Central Asian Cooperation (CAC): Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan.

5. Unification of Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Moldova (GUUAM);

Unfortunately, over the entire period of its existence, none of the regional entities has achieved significant success in the declared integration. Even in the most advanced SSBD and EurAsEC, the free trade zone is not fully operational, and the Customs Union is in its infancy.

K.A. Semyonov lists the obstacles that stand in the way of the process of creating a single integration space on a market basis between the CIS countries - economic, political, etc.:

Firstly, a serious barrier to the formation of a single economic space was the deep difference in the economic situation in individual CIS countries. For example, in 1994, the range of government budget deficit indicators in most Commonwealth countries ranged from 7 to 17% of GDP, in Ukraine – 20, and in Georgia – 80%; Wholesale prices for industrial products in Russia increased 5.5 times, in Ukraine – 30 times, and in Belarus – 38 times. Such diversity of important macroeconomic indicators was obvious evidence of the deep demarcation of the post-Soviet republics, the disintegration of the previously common national economic complex.

Secondly, economic factors that do not contribute to the development of integration processes in the post-Soviet space include, of course, differences in the implementation of economic reforms. In many countries, there are different speeds of movement towards the market; market transformations are far from complete, which hinders the formation of a single market space.

Thirdly, the most important factor hindering the rapid development of integration processes within the CIS is political. It is the political and separatist ambitions of the ruling national elites and their subjective interests that do not allow the creation of favorable conditions for the functioning of enterprises from different countries of the Commonwealth in a single intercountry space.

Fourthly, leading world powers, which have long been accustomed to adhering to double standards, play an important role in slowing down integration processes in the post-Soviet space. At home, in the West, they encourage the further expansion and strengthening of such integration groups as the EU and NAFTA, but with regard to the CIS countries they take the exact opposite position. Western powers are not really interested in the emergence of a new integration group in the CIS that will compete with them on world markets.

The development of the national economy of the Republic of Belarus is largely determined by integration processes within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). In December 1991, the leaders of three states - the Republic of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine - signed the Agreement on the creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States, which announced the end of the USSR. At the first stage of its existence (1991-1994), the CIS countries were dominated by their own national interests , which led to a significant weakening of mutual foreign economic relations, their significant reorientation towards other countries, which was one of the main reasons for the deep economic crisis throughout the post-Soviet space. The formation of the CIS from the very beginning was of a declarative nature and was not supported by relevant regulatory documents ensuring the development of integration processes. The objective basis for the formation of the CIS were: deep integration ties formed over the years of the existence of the USSR, country specialization of production, extensive cooperation at the level of enterprises and industries, and common infrastructure.

The CIS has great natural, human and economic potential, which gives it significant competitive advantages and allows it to take its rightful place in the world. The CIS countries account for 16.3% of the territory globe, 5 - population, 10% of industrial production. The territory of the Commonwealth countries contains large reserves of natural resources that are in demand on world markets. The shortest land and sea (via the Arctic Ocean) route from Europe to Southeast Asia passes through the territory of the CIS. The competitive resources of the CIS countries are also cheap labor and energy resources, which represent important potential conditions for economic growth

The strategic goals of economic integration of the CIS countries are: maximum use of the international division of labor; specialization and cooperation of production to ensure sustainable socio-economic development; improving the level and quality of life of the population of all Commonwealth states.

At the first stage of the functioning of the Commonwealth, the main attention was paid to solving social problems - a visa-free regime for the movement of citizens, recording work experience, paying social benefits, mutual recognition of documents on education and qualifications, pensions, labor migration and protection of the rights of migrants, etc.

At the same time, issues of cooperation in the production sector were resolved, customs clearance and control, transit of natural gas, oil and petroleum products, coordination of tariff policy in railway transport, resolution of economic disputes, etc.

The economic potential of individual CIS countries varies. In terms of economic parameters, Russia stands out sharply among the CIS countries. Most of the Commonwealth countries, having become sovereign, intensified their foreign economic activity, as evidenced by the increase in the share of exports of goods and services in relation to the GDP of each country. Belarus has the highest share of exports - 70% of GDP

The Republic of Belarus has the closest integration ties with the Russian Federation.

The main reasons holding back the integration processes of the Commonwealth states are:

Various models of socio-economic development of individual states;

Different degrees of market transformations and different scenarios and approaches to the selection of priorities, stages and means of their implementation;

Insolvency of enterprises, imperfection of payment and settlement relations; inconvertibility of national currencies;

Inconsistency of customs and tax policies pursued by individual countries;

Application of strict tariff and non-tariff restrictions in mutual trade;

Long distances and high tariffs for cargo transportation and transport services.

The development of integration processes in the CIS is associated with the organization of subregional entities and the conclusion of bilateral agreements. Republic of Belarus and Russian Federation signed in April 1996 the Agreement on the formation of the Community of Belarus and Russia, in April 1997 - the Agreement on the formation of the Union of Belarus and Russia and in December 1999 - the Agreement on the formation of the Union State.

In October 2000, the Treaty establishing the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) was signed, the members of which are Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Russian Federation and Tajikistan. The main goals of the EurAsEC in accordance with the Treaty are the formation of a customs union and a Common Economic Space, coordinating the approaches of states to integration into the world economy and the international trading system, ensuring the dynamic development of participating countries by coordinating the policy of socio-economic transformations to improve the living standards of peoples. The basis of interstate relations within the EurAsEC are trade and economic ties.

In September 2003, an Agreement was signed on the creation of a Common Economic Space (SES) on the territory of Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine, which in turn should become the basis for a possible future interstate association - the Regional Integration Organization (RIO).

These four states (“the Quartet”) intend to create within their territories a single economic space for the free movement of goods, services, capital and labor. At the same time, the SES is considered to be a higher level of integration compared to a free trade area and a customs union. To implement the Agreement, a set of basic measures for the formation of the SES was developed and agreed upon, including measures: on customs tariff policy, development of rules for the application of quantitative restrictions and administrative measures, special protective and anti-dumping measures in foreign trade; regulation of technical barriers to trade, including sanitary and phytosanitary measures; the procedure for transit of goods from third countries (to third countries); competition policy; policy in the field of natural monopolies, in the field of subsidies and public procurement; tax, budget, monetary and exchange rate policies; on the convergence of economic indicators; investment cooperation; trade in services, movement of individuals.

By concluding bilateral agreements and creating a regional grouping within the CIS, individual countries of the Commonwealth are searching for the most optimal forms of combining their potentials to ensure sustainable development and increase competitiveness national economies, since integration processes in the Commonwealth as a whole are not active enough.

When implementing multilateral treaties and agreements adopted in the CIS, the principle of expediency prevails; member states implement them within the limits beneficial to themselves. One of the main obstacles to economic integration is the imperfection of the organizational and legal framework and mechanisms of interaction between members of the Commonwealth.

The possibilities of integration in the Commonwealth countries are significantly limited by the economic and social conditions of individual states, the uneven distribution of economic potential, aggravated by the lack of fuel and energy resources and food, contradictions between the goals of national policy and the interests of the IMF and the World Bank, and the lack of unification of national legal frameworks.

The member states of the Commonwealth face a complex interrelated task of overcoming the threat of its disunity and taking advantage of the development of individual groupings that can speed up the solution of practical issues of interaction and serve as an example of integration for other CIS countries.

Further development integration ties of the CIS member countries can be accelerated with the consistent and phased formation of a common economic space based on the creation and development of a free trade zone, payment union, communication and information spaces, and improvement of scientific, technical and technological cooperation. An important problem is the integration of the investment potential of the participating countries and the optimization of the flow of capital within the Community.

The process of conducting an agreed economic policy within the framework of the effective use of the integrated transport and energy systems, the common agricultural market, as well as the labor market, must be carried out while respecting the sovereignty and protection of the national interests of states, taking into account generally accepted principles international law. This requires convergence of national legislation, legal and economic conditions for the functioning of business entities, and the creation of a system of state support for priority areas of interstate cooperation.

Reintegration in the post-Soviet space takes place within the framework of Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), which was created in 1991. The CIS Charter, signed in 1992, consists of several sections: goals and principles; membership; collective security and military-political cooperation; conflict prevention and peaceful resolution of disputes; cooperation in economic, social and legal spheres; Commonwealth bodies, interparliamentary cooperation, financial issues.

The CIS member states are Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan.

The basis of the economic mechanism of the CIS is the Treaty on the Establishment of an Economic Union (September 24, 1993). On its basis, a number of stages were envisaged: a free trade association, a customs union and a common market.

Goals creations of the Commonwealth were:

· Cooperation in political, economic, environmental, humanitarian and cultural fields;

· Promoting comprehensive and balanced economic and social development of member states within the framework of a common economic space, as well as interstate cooperation and integration;

· Ensuring human rights and fundamental freedoms in accordance with generally recognized principles and norms of international law and OSCE documents;

· Cooperation between Member States to ensure international peace and security, taking effective measures to reduce weapons and military spending, eliminating nuclear weapons and other types of weapons of mass destruction, achieving general and complete disarmament;

· Peaceful settlement of disputes and conflicts between member states.

Currently, the political bodies of the CIS are functioning - the Council of Heads of State and the Council of Heads of Government (CHG). Functional bodies have been formed, including representatives of the relevant ministries and departments of the states that are members of the Commonwealth. This is the Customs Council, the Council for railway transport, Interstate Statistical Committee.

Let us take a closer look at the institutional structure of the Commonwealth of Independent States.

Council of Heads of State is the supreme body of the Commonwealth. It considers and makes decisions on the main issues of the activities of member states. The Council meets twice a year; and extraordinary sessions may be convened at the initiative of any member state. The presidency of the Council is carried out alternately by heads of state.

Council of Heads of Government coordinates cooperation between executive authorities of the member states in economic, social and other areas. Meetings of the Council of Heads of Government are held four times a year. Decisions of the Council of Heads of State and the Council of Heads of Government are made on the basis of consensus.

Council of Foreign Ministers coordinates the activities of member states in the field of foreign policy, including their activities in international organizations.

Coordination and Advisory Committee- a permanent executive and coordinating body of the CIS, consisting of permanent authorized representatives (two from each state) and the coordinator of the Committee. It develops and presents proposals for cooperation in political, economic and other fields, promotes the implementation of economic policies of member states, and deals with the creation of common markets for labor, capital and securities.

Council of Defense Ministers deals with issues related to military policy and the structure of the armed forces of member states.

Economic Court ensures the fulfillment of economic obligations within the Commonwealth. Its competence also includes resolving disputes arising in the process of fulfilling economic obligations.

Interstate Bank deals with issues of mutual payments and clearing settlements between CIS member states.

Human Rights Commission is a consultative body of the CIS that monitors the implementation of human rights obligations assumed by member states of the Commonwealth.

Interparliamentary Assembly consists of parliamentary delegations and ensures inter-parliamentary consultations, discussion of issues of cooperation within the CIS, and develops joint proposals regarding the activities of national parliaments.

CIS Executive Secretariat is responsible for organizational and technical support for the work of CIS bodies. Its functions also include a preliminary analysis of issues submitted for consideration by heads of state, and legal examination of draft documents prepared for the main bodies of the CIS.

The activities of CIS bodies are financed by member states.

Since the creation of the Commonwealth, the main efforts of the member states have been focused on developing and deepening cooperation in such areas as foreign policy, security and defense, economic and financial policy, developing common positions and pursuing a common policy.

The CIS countries have great natural and economic potential, which gives them significant competitive advantages and allows them to take their rightful place in the international division of labor. They have 16.3% of the world's territory, 5% of the population, 25% of natural resources, 10% of industrial production, 12% of scientific and technical potential, 10% of resource-generating goods. Among them are those in demand on the world market: oil and natural gas, coal, timber, non-ferrous and rare metals, potassium salts and other minerals, as well as fresh water reserves and land masses suitable for agriculture and construction.

Other competitive resources of the CIS countries are cheap labor and energy resources, which represent important potential conditions for economic growth (10% of the world's electricity is produced here - the fourth place in the world in terms of its production).

In short, the CIS states have the most powerful natural, production, scientific and technical potential. According to foreign experts, the potential market capacity of the CIS countries is approximately $1,600 billion, and they estimate the achieved production level to be within $500 billion. Reasonable use of the entire complex of favorable conditions and opportunities opens up real prospects for economic growth for the Commonwealth countries, increasing their share and influence on the development of the world economic system.

Currently, economic integration at different speeds is observed within the CIS. There are such integration groups as the Union State of Russia and Belarus, Central Asian Cooperation (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan), the Eurasian Economic Community (Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan), the alliance of Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova - “GUAM” ").