{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020174848688634835, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005379959650302623, 'mean_word_length': 4.8352941176470585, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Integration in the post-Soviet space

Established in 1991, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) is still struggling to define a clear and commonly accepted identity for itself. As the member states hold very different views of the future CIS, they pull the organization in different directions, giving it a somewhat fuzzy character. While the Russian-led core is seeking closer integration, possibly even a transfer of decision-making to the supranational level, another group of states is insisting that the CIS should remain a loose and non-binding forum for cooperation. As a reflection of this reality, the CIS space is home to a number of other organizations which all take their members from the CIS circle. These organizations deliver what the CIS as a whole—because of its lowest common denominator policy—cannot do. The host of acronyms offer something to most member states, but they also cause the CIS space to be highly fragmented. Russia, in particular, has worked to bring all the different parts of the CIS closer together under its own leadership, but has remained largely unsuccessful. With its most recent initiative, a Eurasian Economic Union to be established by 2015, Russia is making a new effort to achieve what has failed so far. Little suggests that it will have any greater success now than before, and it therefore seems likely that the CIS will remain in the future also a complex organizational setting and a difficult challenge for Russia to handle.