Third, the movement of Greater Eurasia towards more intense internal integrity cannot and will never be able to be carried out within the framework of the leadership model characteristic of all international institutions of the past. In Greater Eurasia, three of the four most important powers of the modern world are located – Russia, India and China, each of which balances the others, which is a guarantee against the formation of an unequal model of relations. Unfortunately, the nature of international politics is such that large states inevitably strive to “nationalise” common institutions and governance mechanisms at the global and regional levels in a way that reflects their own interests. We can only count on a balance between them, which makes it impossible for one power to achieve leadership. In Greater Eurasia, such a balance is fairly convincing, which should reassure medium-sized and small countries that their foreign policy will not be dictated by a major player, and that there is no alternative. So far, many of the medium and small countries of Eurasia are also turning to external powers, such as the United States, in order to emphasise their independence in relations with large neighbours. However, as the West's resources are depleted and the region shifts to more selfish behaviour, such a strategy will become less and less pragmatic. Russian policy in Greater Eurasia, however, will always be able to take into account the diversity of interests and values of regional partners, rely on their sovereignty and proceed from the fact that the right to independent decisions is the main value of what we call the World Majority.
Finally, painstaking work on the practical “interconnection” of different forms of institutional and informal interaction between the countries of the region will remain important for Russian policy in Greater Eurasia. Due to its geographical location, Russia is present in most regional forums and formats, and its diplomatic experience includes various types of cooperation within their framework. The process of cooperation between the Eurasian Economic Union and China, which is promoting the Belt and Road initiative, still continues, the SCO agenda is becoming more diverse, and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation is occupying its unique niche. At the same time, the other major Eurasian powers - China and India - do not have the potential to create integration associations comparable in their degree of mutual openness to the EAEU. These are countries that, with few exceptions, do not have formal allies – they are the “lonely planets” of world politics. This can be seen as a challenge, since it means that there is no habit of limiting one’s capabilities, but it can also be positive, since it does not lead to the creation of closed integration associations or close alliances in Greater Eurasia. The task that will inevitably be present in the activities of Russian diplomacy is the “conjugation” of their national interests and the dynamics of the development of structured forms of international cooperation in a huge region.
In general, the richness and diversity of the agenda for interaction between the countries of Greater Eurasia creates for Russia a huge number of promising areas of foreign policy that do not directly depend on the dynamics of the ongoing conflict with the West. Practical successes here will become in the coming years an important incentive for Eurasian countries to achieve national development goals and establish a new international order in which there will be no place for dictatorship and the division of states into a privileged group and an exploited majority.