Suchergebnisse

When the Cold War ended, permanent peace based on close interdependence and strong institutions appeared within reach in Europe. What had been achieved by the mid-1990s fell short of this internationalist vision. The question raised in this article is to what extent the realization of the vision was inhibited by nationalist concerns often ascribed to governments and peoples alike. The conclusion is that nationalist concerns not only hindered but also helped to promote change in the direction advocated by internationalists. `Nationalist internationalism' may be as significant as `deliberate internationalism' in world politics.

This paper discusses security and development issues in Europe's recent history and immediate future. The issue is how the security system affects the pattern of economic development and, conversely, the long-run effects of development on security. To understand this relationship a longer historical perspective is needed. Too much attention has been given to the EC `1992 project' compared to the more unplanned `integration' or political homogenization of greater Europe. Three distinct phases in terms of security orders are distinguished: the Hundred Years' Peace (1815-1914), the Cold War security system (1949-89) and an emerging system called the New European Security Order. We are at present entering a turbulent transition period in which several paths are open. A number of risk factors are identified and analysed. The way the security order is established and immediate security crises managed will influence the possibilities of developing a stable peace order, defined as a structure free from major contradictions and low conflict propensity. A European Peace Order, as distinct from a European Security Order, would presuppose a global peace order, the crucial feature of which will be regionalization on various levels of the world system in accordance with the model of `benign mercantilism', including Europe itself, where subregionalism may emerge as a new form of balance of power politics as an alternative to Pax Germanica.

Constantine P. Danopoulos is professor of political science, San Jose State University. The author to thank Mary Ann Notton for her invaluable help.

As a peculiar bureaucracy whose actions and legislation influence European countries on a daily basis and in countless ways, the EU has gradually become a site within which the political and cultural content of Europe and its limits are constantly defined and reworked. In this chapter, we firstly discuss geopolitical dynamics in Europe with regard to the post-Cold War enlargement process of the EU in particular. Secondly, we focus on the explicit territorial construction of the EU itself in what we call the territory work of the EU. In order to authenticate this concept, the third section discusses the spatial imaginaries and practices of so-called European spatial planning. We introduce European spatial planning as disclosing the ways in which EU governance has gradually emerged as a set of spatial practices and strategies, and modes of spatial calculation that operate on something called EU territory. ; Peer reviewed

The 'greater Nordic space' between Great Britain, Germany and Russia has over time varied with the balance of power. The Baltic States e.g. have been in and out of the space, rejoining by regaining sovereignty after the end of the Cold War. Russia's actions in Ukraine and beyond during 2014 mark the end of the Post-Cold War period and its aspiration to peaceful integration. The small states of the greater Nordic space are now rediscovering their inescapable geopolitical nearness to Russia. Drawing on RSCT and Nordic-Baltic integration literature, the article contributes to understanding the Northern European part of the Euro-Russian Regional Security Complex. Theoretically, the article links RSCT and integration logics through the twin concepts of a 'security region' (given outside-in as one part of a negatively defined RSC), and a 'political region' (created inside-out under the shield provided by the security region). To link the two concepts, Heidegger's idea of Geworfenheit, or thrownness, is employed to capture how the states of the greater Nordic space are always already subject to the dynamics underlying that space and how this condition affects the states' interpretation of their changing surroundings, including translation into political regionality. Empirically, the article therefore argues that Russia's new foreign policy has created a greater Nordic space 'security region' – supported by the United States – that is paving the way for new integration initiatives to a strengthened 'political region' inside the space, possibly as a 'greater Nordic region'.

An examination of the varied ways questions related to ethnicity, migration, & statehood are posed in different parts of Europe strives to avoid the oversimplified east-west contrasts that are prevalent in many accounts of contemporary Europe. "Immigrant ethnicity" & "territorial nationality" are described as two ways ethnic heterogeneity can be socially organized & politically expressed. It is maintained that Western Europe endorses the immigrant-ethnicity model in which ethnic groups arise through migration while Eastern Europe sanctions the territorial-nationality model that focuses on indigenous ethnic groups. Attention is called to acute differences between the two groups in political claims made in the name of ethnicity. The immigrant-ethnic model summons politics of anti-discrimination, civil inclusion, & "soft multiculturalism," while territorial nationality stresses claims to public recognition, support for cultural activities, & even special immunities. Problems related to immigration in Western Europe have centered on immigration from the outside as opposed to the Eastern European focus on emigration. The importance of state-building in Eastern Europe is discussed. 50 References. J. Lindroth