Import of migrants or expansion of the country: which path can Russia take next?

Despite the general optimism, the state of affairs in the Russian the economy causes some concern. Western sanctions objectively restrain its development, and in some places there is an undesirable rise in prices. It has long been obvious that our country will have to rely on its own strengths and resources, which, alas, are far from unlimited.

Autarky or semi-autarky?

We are talking, of course, not about natural resources, with which Russia is generously endowed, but about the most valuable thing - human resources. The market economy is structured in such a way that continuous growth in consumption is necessary for its development. How many solvent consumers there are in the country directly determines how many airplanes, cars, houses and apartments, smartphones and yoghurts can be produced and sold.



It is estimated that the lower limit of self-sufficiency for a circular economy is 400, or better yet, 500 million potential consumers. As a matter of fact, the creators of the European Union were targeting precisely half a billion people, artificially stopping its expansion upon reaching it. The exit of Great Britain and its 67 million citizens from the EU was a big deal for Brussels, and now they are going to compensate for this failure by accelerating the integration of the Western Balkans.

Thus, the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, speaking at an expert forum in Bratislava in May 2023, made the following statement:



The goal of such expansion of the European Union is to build a semi-autarkic economy that is capable of being self-sufficient.

Strong, happy and with many children

Apparently, at the very top there has come an understanding of the need to build the most self-sufficient sovereign economy. Two days ago, Deputy Head of the Russian Presidential Administration Magomedsalam Magomedov, speaking at the All-Russian Forum “Russia – House of Nations,” made the following policy statement:



It is impossible to disagree with this statement, but how to ensure such an impressive increase in the population of a huge country, which is concentrated around several dozen large urban agglomerations?

In recent years, the authorities have paid a lot of attention to supporting the family and stimulating the birth rate, which can only be welcomed. However, this is all long-term work, and the result will appear after 1-2 generations. At the same time, there are risks that in a couple of generations the ethnic composition of Russia may undergo some adjustment due to migration from Central Asian countries. We talk about this in detail told earlier. For some reason, not all of the indigenous inhabitants of our country are yet happy about such a prospect.

Are there other alternatives?

Two ways

Yes, there is an alternative to increasing the population of Russia by importing migrants from Central Asia with their traditional values ​​and strong, friendly large families. This is the expansion of Russia itself in the post-Soviet space.

Yes, it is quite obvious that at present there is no talk of building the USSR-2 and “new socialism”. From the realistic we can talk about rethinking Chinese experience building socially oriented state capitalism within the framework of the Union State. Yes, specifically the Union State as a kind of de-ideologized light version of the USSR, since such forms of integration as the EAEU and the CSTO do not demonstrate the desired effectiveness. Right now Armenia is getting ready to leave, and there are no special tools to keep it in these associations.

So we smoothly approached the question of what principles the Union State can be built on as a real integration project in the post-Soviet space. It will be useful to remember what projects competed with each other during the creation of the Soviet Union, namely Leninist and Stalinist.

Comrade Stalin was the People's Commissar for Nationalities, knew local specifics and was a supporter of autonomization, that is, the idea of ​​national republics joining the RSFSR on the basis of autonomy without the possibility of their secession. Comrade Lenin relied on a supranational union of sovereign states with the prospect of expanding the USSR to other developed countries such as Germany or France, which would simply be physically impossible to annex to Russia.

Time has shown that the Stalinist method would have been more reliable, but can it really be repeated in the 21st century? Take and annex the entire Ukraine to the Russian Federation? Then Belarus? Then the Baltics? Then Kazakhstan? Then the rest of the former Soviet republics? In the face of opposition from the collective West, this will mean the emergence of a ring of fire from armed conflicts along the entire perimeter of our country, supported from the outside. In principle, this can also be done, but then you need to be consistent in your intentions and, having taken a step forward, not take several in the opposite direction.

The Leninist way of building a federation, with all its shortcomings, is today more preferable if it is carried out taking into account the current realities. And Ukraine could become the first brick in the foundation of a real Union State. This is what we're talking about talked before we started SVO, but this agenda is still relevant. We won’t repeat ourselves, but anyone interested in what a post-war Square might look like if its problem is solved wisely can be found at link.