s The Russo–Ukraine War raises important questions on the dynamics of regional leadership and followership in what may be termed “Russian-led Eurasia.” These questions, in particular, the strength of Russian leadership in the region is complicated by the ambiguity in existing literature and competing images of Russia's relations with long-standing allies—notably Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan—which are often portrayed in terms of a “community of fate” or partners destined for closer integration but also as a “community of fortune” or ad hoc, situational partners, loosely centered on Russia. This article offers an innovative theoretical and methodological exploration of Russia's relations with regional partner states by utilizing the English School of International Relations and regional integration organizations to assess Russia's regional leadership. As argued in this article, Russian-led Eurasia may be understood as an example of a regional interstate society with Russian hegemony serving as a socially conferred, binding institution. But this hegemony is inherently unstable owing to Russia's inability to balance hegemonic “rights” with “responsibilities.” War in Ukraine did not create this problem, but it has created the conditions for leadership transition in the region.

中文翻译：

---

俄罗斯在欧亚大陆的领导地位：是团结还是分裂？


俄乌战争对所谓“俄罗斯主导的欧亚大陆”的地区领导力和追随力动态提出了重要问题。这些问题，特别是俄罗斯在该地区的领导力的实力，由于现有文献中的模糊性以及俄罗斯与长期盟友（特别是亚美尼亚、白俄罗斯、哈萨克斯坦和吉尔吉斯斯坦）关系的相互矛盾的形象而变得复杂化，这些盟友经常被描述为一个“命运共同体”或注定要更紧密一体化的伙伴，但也作为一个“命运共同体”或临时的、情境伙伴，松散地以俄罗斯为中心。本文利用英国国际关系学院和区域一体化组织来评估俄罗斯的地区领导力，对俄罗斯与地区伙伴国家的关系进行了创新的理论和方法论探索。正如本文所述，俄罗斯领导的欧亚大陆可以被理解为区域性国家间社会的一个例子，俄罗斯霸权充当社会赋予的、具有约束力的机构。但由于俄罗斯无法平衡霸权的“权利”与“责任”，这种霸权本质上是不稳定的。乌克兰战争并没有造成这个问题，但却为该地区领导人换届创造了条件。