Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2003 European Re-Union: Representations of Eastern Europe in NATO and EU Expansion Jason N. Dittmer Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES EUROPEAN RE-UNION: REPRESENTATIONS OF EASTERN EUROPE IN NATO AND EU EXPANSION By JASON N. DITTMER A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Geography In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Spring Semester, 2003 The members of the Committee approve the dissertation of Jason N. Dittmer defended on March 25, 2003 ______________________________ Patrick O’Sullivan Professor Directing Dissertation Jonathan Grant Outside Committee Member ______________________________ Jonathan Leib Committee Member ______________________________ Jan Kodras Committee Member Approved: _____________________________ Barney Warf, Chair, Department of Geography The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above committee members. ii This dissertation is dedicated to my mother, who always made her children’s education a priority and gave up many of her own personal satisfactions to make sure that we were in the best schools with the best teachers. Thanks Mom… This dissertation is also dedicated to Karl Fiebelkorn, who would be mortified to know that something so academic as this dissertation was dedicated to him. But think of it this way Karl – this is just to tide you over until I can dedicate to you my magnum opus: “I See How It Is”: Reflections on Brotherhood. You are missed, Karl. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation would not have been possible without the assistance of a great many of my colleagues and friends, who have all influenced my thoughts on these matters (and many others). In particular I would like to thank Dr. Patrick O’Sullivan, who read a great many drafts of varying quality. His critiques kept me intellectually honest and for that and all of his effort I am grateful. Also, special thanks to Dr. Jonathan Leib, Dr. Jan Kodras, and Dr. Jonathan Grant for their reviews and help. Former committee members, namely Dr. Jason Hackworth and Dr. Burt Atkins, also served brilliantly, if briefly, in the formulation of my original concept for this dissertation. Of course, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention my graduate student colleagues here at Florida State University, especially Jeff Ueland and Andy Walter, who allowed me to bounce ideas off them (even if most of those ideas were of ways to waste time and postpone our graduation). In addition, recognition for Aristotle’s Coffee Garage is also in order. The staff’s donation of many dozens of white mochas to this cause is gratefully acknowledged. A special acknowledgement also has to go to Dr. Lydia Pulsipher and the people of Montserrat, who collectively hosted me during the summer of 2002 while the first draft of this dissertation was being written. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES vi ABSTRACT vii 1. Introduction 1 2. Philosophical Bases 14 3. Research Question and Methodology 26 4. Literature Review 36 5. Operationalizing the Identities 62 6. Central Europe in Expansion Debates 73 7. Representations of Eastern Europe in EU Expansion 85 8. Representations of Eastern Europe in NATO Expansion 110 9. Russia 154 10. Regions in EU and NATO Expansion 186 11. Other Countries in EU and NATO Expansion 201 12. Perspectives on the Media 229 13. Conclusion 244 APPENDICES 251 REFERENCES 255 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 266 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Map of some East-West divisions in Europe 52 Figure 2: Graph of total EU articles and references to Central Europe therein 82 Figure 3: Graph of total NATO articles and references to Central Europe therein 83 Figure 4: Total articles and references to Central Europe therein 84 vi ABSTRACT This dissertation seeks to establish the relationship between formal political processes, such as NATO and EU expansion, and the formation and re- construction of identity, in this case “Western” identity and “European” identity. By studying this nexus between political action and identity formation some conclusions regarding the meanings of those identities are drawn. The methodology used to study this intersection of politics and identity is a content analysis of newspaper articles covering NATO and EU expansion from April 17, 1991 to April 19, 2002 found in the Lexis-Nexis newspaper database. The output of this analysis is a series of representations, not only of Eastern Europe but also of specific states within Eastern Europe (such as Russia) and regional identities such as Central Europe or the Baltic States. These representations are taken (with historical evidence) to constitute, to varying degrees, the “Other” for NATO and the EU. Thus, these representations are used to reflect back on the identities that are inherent to those organizations, namely that of “the West” and “Europe”. vii 1. INTRODUCTION This chapter will provide an introduction to the historical period and political processes that are the subject of this dissertation. Its purpose is to provide the reader with the background information necessary to appreciate the more theoretical chapters of this dissertation. The End of the Cold War The removal of Cold War barriers across Europe has thrown the imaginary geographies of Europe into a period of transition. As soon as American and Western European leaders saw advantage in expanding their institutions into Eastern Europe they began the long process of re-imagining Eastern Europe to make it more palatable to their constituents. Traditional signposts of Eastern “stagnation” were repositioned further east on the map and Western history was reconstituted and reformulated to include more of the Cold War Eastern Bloc. However, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU) expansion debates were not the beginning of the discursive creation of regional borders within Europe or of the attachment of meanings to places. These debates simply serve as a useful lens through which to observe the shifting imaginary geographies of Europe in the post-Cold War era. One of the larger issues facing foreign policy makers and the public during the post-Cold War era has been the future of NATO. Its Cold War function of deterring Soviet Western expansion fulfilled, the decision of whether to let NATO wither from lack of purpose or to convert it to some other function was made in favor of expanding NATO’s membership to turn it into the foundation of European security. However, in the United States and in Europe this expansion is not simply a geostrategic decision, it is an inherently political process. Although “members of Congress often have tremendous freedom to act in foreign policy because most voters are not paying attention to these issues, (Goldgeier, 1999, p.110)” the country’s morale and dedication in the event of a 1 defensive war in Eastern Europe will be distinctly weaker if there is no geopolitical reason for the ally and no perceived bond between the two nations. The creation of a perceived bond between Eastern European countries and NATO/EU states has become an ongoing goal of leaders on both sides. In the United States in particular, permanent military alliances have been frowned upon for the entire period of American independent history dating back to George Washington’s farewell address, with this policy lasting until the end of World War II and America’s new superpower status. Still, George Washington’s maxim (the address was edited and amended by Madison and Hamilton, but the ideas ensconced were Washington’s from start to finish) rings true in many American citizens’ ears to this day. Overcoming this isolationist impulse among the American people has, in the past, required an overriding geopolitical imperative. This was the case in the creation of NATO and also in the creation of the South East Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) and others. However, in the era following the fall of communism there is a definite lack of overwhelming threats to American security to justify in American minds an extension of security guarantees to new nations. The apparent danger in the eyes of most Americans now resides in terrorist threats (i.e. Osama bin Laden’s 1993 attack on the World Trade Center and massive terrorism of the type seen in September 2001). Other significant threats include “rogue states” (i.e. Iraq, Iran, and North Korea), as seen in the public support for a national missile defense. Neither of these has traditionally warranted permanent treaties as a basis of defense. The American public is more apt to overlook this lack of necessity if they feel a cultural bond with the partner nation in a treaty. This is often perceived as a “natural” alliance, one between nations with common ideals and common perceptions of the rest of the world, often described as the “Western” culture. This can be seen in brochures that are used by the United States government to promote NATO: “The ties between Europe and North America are deep and durable, having survived wars of independence, occasional disagreements, and the separation imposed by the Atlantic Ocean. Over the past five centuries, these ties have evolved into a strong bond based on a shared history as well as on common 2 values. From the Magna Carta to the Declaration of Independence to the Declaration of the Rights of Man, Europeans and Americans have espoused a vision of individual rights, rule of law, economic freedom, and democracy. These similarities in culture, heritage, and ideals are what have linked us together for hundreds of years (USIA, 1999, p.3).” In fact, one of the things most often cited by the United States in these public relations brochures for NATO as a reason for NATO’s success is the common vision that the member-states have.