Final answer:
The 'Eurasian branch had itself split' references the complex history of geopolitical and ethnic divisions in Eurasia following significant events like World War I and the Cold War. It encompasses the rise of the Eurasianist movement and the creation of the Eurasian Economic Community as well as the current political tensions and ideologies influencing the region's nation-states and identities.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question "Eurasian branch had itself split" pertains to the complex geopolitical and ethnic histories within the European and Asian continents, particularly after significant events such as World War I, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the more recent geopolitical shifts in the Eurasian region. It touches on the dynamics of national self-determination, the reconfigurations of territories, the emergence of new nation-states, and the political ideologies and movements that have influenced these processes.
Following World War, I, attempts were made to divide Europe into nation-states based on the principle of self-determination, leading to political, ethnic, and economic strife. In Eastern Europe, various ethnic groups sought to establish their own states, while Southern Europe faced similar challenges. The post-Cold War era brought with it greater political freedom, the enlargement of the European Union, and the challenges associated with ethnic nationalism and regional stability.
The Eurasianist movement arose as a political ideology advocating for a distinct Eurasian identity, separate from both European and Asian influences. This belief system has played a role in Russia's attempts to project influence across the territory of the former Soviet Union, including the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Community. Over time, Eastern Europe has been considered a shatter belt due to the conflicts and divisions that have plagued the region. It is within this broader historical context that one can understand the implications of the "Eurasian branch" in question.