CEU eTD Collection T C HE OOPERATION IN In partial of fulfillment requirementsthe for thedegree of Doctor of Philosophy P OLITICS OF F RIENDSHIP Department of Political Science Central Central University European R C Luciana-Alexandra Ghica Luciana-Alexandra EGIONAL Supervisor: András Supervisor: Bozóki ENTRAL AND ENTRAL Budapest, Hungary Budapest, 1990-2007 Submitted to Submitted C 2008 By OMMUNITIES I NTERGOVERNMENTAL E ASTERN ? E UROPE CEU eTD Collection I hereby declare that this work is entirely my own, except where otherwise indicated, and indicated, not itthat does for contain any materials accepted in degrees other institutions. any other otherwise where except own, my is entirely work this that declare hereby I Budapest, 3 SeptemberBudapest, 2008 Luciana Alexandra Ghica CEU eTD Collection placed in placed one offour meaning design,of strata possible production context, (background, could be and each aspolitical phenomenon international regionalism space of discursive All form background. these the aspects a certain institutional and normative-representational ason aswell context, political in aparticular develops cohesiveness regional sametime, the At dimensions. normative-representational and material/institutional both has cohesiveness Inline andthemselvessocial constructivism, with regional act represent asagroup. inhabitingreferslimited of space degreetowhichagroup actors concept the acontiguous to find paradigm, this necessity the regional the integration/interdependence to alternative to an particularly introductionthe through of conceptof the regional by cohesiveness. Prompted frameworks of social constructivism and international regionalism, which I further develop Iusethe conceptual purpose, Forthis initiatives. intergovernmental European regional major East and Central the evolution of and creation the comparatively analyze action, I andrhetoric hypothesis this of conditionality investigate democratic to community.order In democratic of the be aspart recognised in to attempt mental the spaces better appropriate play in this case.intervention. At the same Instead, agreetime, that the European Union had the decisive roleI in the process,argue even if not through direct post that democraticCold intergovernmental arrangements establishedin the aftermath of Yugoslav the to wars, seems War ratherregionalism than EU conditionalitymostlydevelopment. focusing Existing regional topic, onthe scholarship on the has been wasalso mostly although Europe, pointing historical the andpoliticalthis circumstances werenot towards a raceat to in Cold War Eastern Central and post phenomenon a widespread hasbecome regionalism In this investigatedissertation, I from a social constructivist perspective A BSTRACT how international CEU eTD Collection innovations and analytical framework. conceptual proposed due tothe especially interaction, international on well research as for as studies, regionalism of field larger the for relevance have may dissertation this conditions, intergovernmental underpinnedhistorical arrangements account bya of their constitutive theoreticallyimportant framedmost Central monograph andregional of the EastEuropean in creation the and developmentinitiatives of the under scrutiny. Beyond producing a involved officials high-ranked with interviews with supplemented are These releases. press founding charters, treaties, statements, resolutions, declarations,minutes meetingsof and since have particularly their produced creation, structures intergovernmental cooperation regional the that majorthe documents are dissertation of this main sources the data, although it has also some can be best as interpretativist, research the From institutions. classified this perspective, positivist and ideas allegiances. events, historical to reports, and interviews speeches, as such materials text Finally, spoken inor written from common ranging data empirical set of raw awide analysis requires terms of the type of first as is social specifically, understood andits More discourse practice Michel Foucault. hand of methods, Iuse inspiredby discourse analysistools loosely of archaeologicalthe method using the particular case of post Cold War Central and East potential the concept prospective atidentifying regional one,aiming the cohesiveness of European regionalism. In terms isa dissertation the setting, conceptual this to due Mainly articulations. inter-strata as the as well each within anddeveloped, hastoidentify strata, features of one dynamics these the andIn ordertounderstand practices). how Central andEuropean regionalism East has CEU eTD Collection the Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for facilitating the access to documents and people to Larry LeDuc and Erin Jenne for providing methodological guidance in the initial phases; My alsogo thanks endeavour. intellectual satisfying researchmay be an extremely grounded theoretically why forgot to I tended time me each reminding inspiring, always been have muchalso indebted toSorin Antohi and Balazs Trencsenyi, whose questions and comments late professor Alexandru Du to identity for discourses curiosity myprofessional first Atthe same time, Iowe gratitude. moments mostyears. difficultthe is of last the It tohim I want toexpress that mydeepest guided my enthusiasm meand andsupported researchcuriosities, overflowing insome of First andI am foremost, indebted tomy supervisor and friend AndrásBozóki, whopatiently intentions of some people whom I like to name here. in particular this formatwithout valuable the and suggestions, comments, support good and life. private Despite this all ghosts, it story these existsbuthave would beenpossible not my research haunting one each stories, many produced different that for reasons all, been at have not might story this least, Not alternative). the choose to temptation resist to difficult choice mostly because thebut sincePhD it seems thatexplicitly only two categories of texts exist – writtenrequires or perfect, I had to makemuch inregional cooperation Europe.” Central It couldand Eastern alsohave perfect been a a written one (though sometimescommented when I told himits subjectatthe beginning ofmy “there research,PhD isnot it was Schöpflin George as because, short very been have could It ways. many in different been have might story This been. have could that stories the of ghosts by the haunted all are stories that remarked once Rushdie, Salman storytellerIam, named than A far-better Ġ u. Thatis why Idedicate this dissertationhis memory.to am I A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS CEU eTD Collection presences)in haunt degrees different this story. Its shortcomings fully are,of course, mine. couldfor notthank their enough my long patience for absences sometimes or overwhelming All these people’s visions and ideas, as well as the support of my family and friends (whom I Nicolaïdis, Othon Anastasakis and Dimitar Bechev. research and stimulating discussions in this place, I would like to thank particularly Kalypso intellectual my For European St.Antony’shome College fruitful Centre. Studies andthe at allowedspend me oneto University yearatthe whereIfoundOxford, of aninspiring Open SocietyDuringmy doctoral research, Icontinuously benefited from financialthe support of the Institute. myself. its details of sure A Britishtheir effort to understand theForeign for conferences seminars anddoctoral CEUdepartmental the to andparticipants colleagues story that I was trying to tell andthemacted while sometimesCommonwealth as not reviewersvery of theOffice first draftfellowship of this dissertation; also as well as the academic staff, relevant for the research; Irina Culic, András Gér IrinaCulic, for theresearch; relevant Ę , Carol Harrington, and Aida Hozic, who andAidaHozic, , Carol Harrington, CEU eTD Collection CONTEXT ANDFACTORS POLICYCHANGE CONTEXT OFFOREIGN A TRIPLE TRANSITION, MULTIPLE TRANSFORMATIONS: CHAPTER 6 PALIMPSESTS REGIONAL IDENTITY CHAPTER 5 IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE OF INTERNATIONAL REGIONALISM PREHISTORY HISTORICAL ANAMNESIS: CHAPTER 4 OF REGIONALCOHESIVENESS ANDPOLITICAL CONTEXT HISTORICAL BACKROUNDS PALIMPSESTS: CANONS, LEGACIES, PART II FIELD OF INTERNATIONAL REGIONALISM THE CHAPTER 3 OF REGIONALISM RECONSTRUCTION A CONSTRUCTIVIST CHAPTER 2 REGIONALISM MAPPING INTERNATIONAL CHAPTER 1 REGIONALISM OF INTERNATIONAL FOR ACONSTRUCTIVISTANALYSIS FRAMEWORK THECONCEPTUAL BUILDING PART I INTRODUCTION S UMMARY OF i C ONTENTS 156 139 107 82 55 31 1 CEU eTD Collection CONCLUSIONS OF DIMENSION REGIONAL COHESIVENESS RHETORIC CHAPTER 9 OFREGIONAL DIMENSION COHESIVENESS INSTITUTIONAL CHAPTER 8 IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE INTERNATIONAL REGIONALISM OFPOSTCOLDWARDEVELOPMENT THE TONORMALITY: FROM UNCERTAINTY CHAPTER 7 IN CENTRAL ANDEASTERN EUROPE OFREGIONAL COHESIVENESS DYNAMICS PART III ii 297 268 224 191 CEU eTD Collection 3.3 Assessing institutional cohesiveness welfare From andback to 3.2 security regionalism Thelegal ofinternational 3.1 nature THE FIELDREGIONALISM OFINTERNATIONAL CHAPTER 3 2.3 Introducing regional cohesiveness regionalism vocabulary of Aconstructivist 2.2 2.1 Socialpremises constructivist OFREGIONALISM A CONSTRUCTIVISTRECONSTRUCTION CHAPTER 2 1.3 International as regionalism inquiry academic politics inworld regionalism international of evolution The 1.2 The universe1.1 of regionalism contemporary REGIONALISM INTERNATIONAL MAPPING CHAPTER 1 REGIONALISM OF INTERNATIONAL FOR ACONSTRUCTIVISTANALYSIS FRAMEWORK THECONCEPTUAL BUILDING PART I of thesis the Overview framework andConceptual methodological andhypotheses state of research Current Puzzle INTRODUCTION LIST OFABBREVIATIONS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES 3.3.2 3.3.2 Institutional design 3.3.1 What scale matters? alternative Afour-dimension 3.2.2 3.2.1 The model bipolar Sources Units of analysis and case selection Methodological approach regionalism international of construction social The C ONTENTS iii 100 VII 98 97 90 85 85 83 82 76 61 56 55 49 43 32 31 28 26 21 15 13 13 VI 4 1 1 CEU eTD Collection 7.2 Post-conflict regionalism: From international to regional ownership regional to international From regionalism: Post-conflict 7.2 The quest7.1 for security IN CENTRAL ANDEASTERNEUROPE REGIONALISM INTERNATIONAL POSTCOLDWAR OF THE DEVELOPMENT UNCERTAINTY TONORMALITY: FROM CHAPTER 7 IN CENTRAL ANDEASTERNEUROPE OFREGIONAL COHESIVENESS DYNAMICS PART III 6.3 Rethinking foreign policy in a changing environment transition triple The 6.2 6.1 The break ups CONTEXT OFFOREIGNAND FACTORS POLICY CHANGE TRANSFORMATIONS: MULTIPLE A TRIPLETRANSITION, CHAPTER 6 competition without Marginality 5.4 5.3 Competing marginalities 5.2 In search of the Middle Ground “Other” the of invention The Europe: Eastern 5.1. PALIMPSESTS IDENTITY REGIONAL CHAPTER 5 power Soviet periphery of atthe Hopeful 4.5 alternatives 4. 4 The Soviet-led regional arrangements 4.3 Unstable times, improbable projects alliances Unwanted 4.2 The 4.1 national time of awakening IN CENTRAL ANDEASTERN EUROPE PREHISTORY OFINTERNATIONAL REGIONALISM HISTORICAL ANAMNESIS: CHAPTER 4 OF REGIONALCOHESIVENESS ANDPOLITICALCONTEXT HISTORICAL BACKROUNDS PALIMPSESTS: CANONS, LEGACIES, PART II 7.1.4 Cooperation The Black7.1.4 SeaEconomic Cooperation Baltic The 7.1.3 7.1.2 The Visegrád Group TheCentral Initiative7.1.1 European 6.1.2 The disintegration of Yugoslavia 6.1.1 The end of communism The Warsaw4.4.2 Pact Comecon 4.4.1 Balkan Pact The Second 4.3.2 TheBalkan4.3.1 (con)federation iv 209 205 202 198 192 192 191 176 167 160 156 156 156 152 150 143 140 139 134 130 124 123 122 119 117 113 108 107 CEU eTD Collection REFERENCE LIST REFERENCE APPENDICES CONCLUSIONS andThe Visegrád facing Baltic Group the Cooperation enlargement Discursive9.2 practices: 9.1 Internal rhetoric COHESIVENESS OFREGIONAL RHETORIC DIMENSION CHAPTER 9 cohesiveness institutional of mechanisms and Factors 8.3 practices Institutional 8.2 8.1 Institutional design COHESIVENESS OFREGIONAL DIMENSION INSTITUTIONAL CHAPTER 8 The regionalism of 7.3 consolidation democratic to the main European security to themain (as of security 2007) organizations and economic European Appendix 3Membership of Central andEuropean East countries Central and EastEuropean Initiatives (1989-2007) Appendix 2Evolution membershipof of Appendix 1Instances of Central and EastEuropean regionalism (as of 2007) Cooperation Baltic The 9.2.2 9.2.1 The Visegrád Group The 9.1.3 pragmatic Central Europe 9.1.2 Haunting Balkans 9.1.1 Marginal identities inRegional8.2.5 cooperation environmental security areas in areas societal security Regional the 8.2.4 cooperation in economicareas security Regional the 8.2.3 cooperation in8.2.2 Regional military cooperation security areas inRegional8.2.1 cooperation political security areas 8.1.7 The Visegrád Group 8.1.6 The South East EuropeanCooperation Process Cooperative TheSoutheast Initiative 8.1.5 European Process The Danube Cooperation 8.1.4 TheCentral Initiative8.1.3 European Cooperation The Black8.1.2 SeaEconomic 8.1.1. The Baltic Cooperation 7.2.3 7.2.3 The South East EuropeanCooperation Process CooperativeEuropean Southeast Initiative 7.2.2 Europe Eastern Stability South and Pactfor the 7.2.1 From the Royaumont Initiative to v 316 315 314 312 312 297 290 283 281 279 272 269 269 268 261 260 259 253 250 249 248 247 242 241 237 231 228 225 224 224 216 214 213 209 CEU eTD Collection Fig. 7 Fig. 6 Fig. 5 Fig. 4 Fig. 3 Fig. 2 Fig. 1 Figures Synopsis of institutional design Table indicators 8.8 Institutional design of the Visegrád Table Group 8.7 design of the Process Institutional South East European Cooperation Table 8.6 Institutional design of the Southeast European Table Cooperative 8.5 Initiative Institutional design of the Danube Table Cooperation 8.4 Process Institutional design of the Central Table European 8.3 Initiative Institutional design of the Black Sea Table Economic 8.2 Cooperation Institutional design of the Table Baltic 8.1 Cooperation Dimensions of institutional cohesiveness for Table international 3.3 regionalism Contemporary security Table concepts 3.2 Traditional perspectives on internationalTable 3.1 regionalism Regionalism and the representation ofTable interest2.4 of interest elites and the Political representation Table 2.3 The boundaries of Table regionalism 2.2 Categories of regionalism and their Table normative 2.1 background Regionalism in scholarship contemporary Table 1.1 Tables L IST OF TABLESAND FIGURES Orientation of regional arrangements ofregional Orientation Dimensions andelements ofregional cohesiveness The field of regionalism Regional identity formation region of a construction The The constructivist perspective on political/social reality Strata of meaning production vi 262 248 246 242 240 236 231 227 103 93 79 67 66 63 58 18 95 89 75 74 72 69 39 CEU eTD Collection Phare PfP OSCE NB8 NATO NACC IVF IMF ILO ILC GUUAM GUAM FTA FDI EU ENP EFTA EBRD DCP CSCE CMEA CIS CFSP CEI CEFTA CBSS BSTDB BSEC BCM BC AII L ISTOF ABBREVIATIONS Nordic Baltic Council Organization Treaty Atlantic North Organization Labour International Commission Law International Group of Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and R. of Moldova Group of Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and R. of Moldova Agreement Free Trade investment direct Foreign European Union European Neighbourhood Policy / Free TradeArea European Free TradeAgreement European Development and Reconstruction for Bank European Danube Cooperation Process Community States Independentof Council of the Baltic Sea States Baltic Council of Ministers Cooperation Baltic Adriatic Ionian Initiative Poland Hungary Aid for Economic Reconstruction Peace for Partnership Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe North Atlantic Cooperation Council Fund Visegrád International Fund Monetary International Conference onSecurity and Co-operation in Europe COMECON) (also Assistance Economic Mutual for Council Common Foreign and Security Policy Initiative European Central FreeAgreement Trade Central Europe Bank and Development SeaTrade Black Cooperation SeaEconomic Black vii CEU eTD Collection WTO WG WEU V4 USSR UNMIK UN/ECE UN SP SME SEECP SEEDM SECI RTA Q4 World Trade Organization World Trade Union of SocialistSoviet Republics United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe agreementRegional trade Quadragonale Cooperation Working Group EuropeanUnion Western Visegrád(since Group 1993) United Nations Economic for Europe Commission Nations United enterprise medium and Small Process Cooperative East European South Defense Ministerial European Eastern South CooperationSoutheast European Initiative viii CEU eTD Collection definition, detailed A more as well as research. a discussion present the in ofis preferred these issuescooperation is presented international regional interm the chapter 2. connotations, and inand media. not international equallyinterestedin Though of regional the dimension in both high politics have European visibility the rather Europe alsoacquired Eastern South for Pact Stability the and (BSEC) Organization Cooperation theBlackSeaEconomic Group, initiatives suchas them,Among Visegrád the emergedinthearea. programs and activities regional smaller other various and cooperation of schemes intergovernmental regional arrangements. intergovernmental regional numerous in creating of Sinceand countries engaging thefall of the areastarted the communism, Puzzle method. by archaeological Foucauldian the analysis tools inspired anduse discourse paradigm, integration/interdependence regional the Europe. in Cold War Eastern Central and post phenomenon a widespread hasbecome regionalism regionalization as such expressions or terms other by designated often are institutions adjacent the and agreements intergovernmental these literature, In the etc.). institutions academic concluded atinferiorthose levels and of the political/bureaucraticgovernment and ofstate heads of hierarchy level or the betweenat other concluded national actors agreements (i.e.the NGOs, between differentiates does not excludedefinition the existenceworking This of terms. intergovernmentalregional in cooperation cooperation of inonly space the to one sector refer and of activity meetings, but it intergovernmental through mainly developed and established are that countries neighbouring between cooperation 2 well as chapter 5. countries. Formore details onthis definition, see the methodological sectionthisin introductory chapter, as research, the notion refers to all the formercommunist but not Soviet space, partially and to theBaltic from the rest of the neighbouring space, there is no agreement to what exactly it covers. Forthe purpose of this 1 I In this investigatedissertation, I from a social constructivist perspective Inthis dissertation, regional intergovernmental cooperation refers to those frameworks of multilateral Although there are many references to Central and Eastern Europe, as well as various criteria to distinguish it NTRODUCTION 1 For this purpose, I design the concept of regional cohesiveness as an alternative to alternative an as cohesiveness regional of concept the design I purpose, this For and regionalism . However, since all these equivalents have also other (sometimes stronger) (sometimes other also have equivalents these all since However, . 1 regional cooperation,regional subregionalcooperation 2 Between 1990 and 2007, over adozen Between1990and2007,over how international , CEU eTD Collection intergovernmental arrangements and its evolution, see Appendix 1 at the end of this dissertation. 3 intergovernmental groupings. regional least three isat memberof state European East and Central average,every On an initiative. members of such founding arealso states Mostof these arrangement. former communist states acquired membership of at least one post-Cold War regional foreign policy,Central East European all countriesand haveinvolved inthe All process. the their they neighbours havecould used only bilateral the formats.and trilateral Infact, they with (OSCE),while relations the for in Co-operation Europe forand Security Organization andthe such engagedcooperative theCouncilof structures, onlyinlarger Europe as could have governments European Furthermore, Central the and East bepresent. not should goals, of in terms especially overlapping, whilst smaller, been have should initiatives assumption, number rational of break the the tothe then, according Yugoslavia, actor upof War and Cold the by end of the generated concerns address thesecurity to aimed only states reconstruction identicalof Balkans,the have membershipalmost and very similar goals. If in the aftermath of created both (SEECP), the Process European Cooperation East South andthe (SECI) Initiative Bosnian war with the in overlap membership both and goals. For example, Southeast the European Cooperative purpose to foster theMost political of and theeconomic existing globe. the around similar than phenomena faster least twice wasat regionalism arrangements WarEuropean only post-Cold of andahalfdecade Central one and East existence, emerged inthirty years (Hurrell Frohman1998, Sunkel 2000, with2000). In contrast, its overlap of processes regional sameamount the America, Latin around In 2001, Buzan2003). either in Öjendal yearsfifty (Schulz, and inmembership Söderbaum, and almost re-created developed created, been have initiatives of number similar a studies, regionalism for case a classic instance, for or goals, Asia, South In phenomenon. remarkable a itself in is camp communist former in the spread while some Forabrief overview Central of the and East Europeanmembership to the post-Cold Warregional 3 Compared to other regions, the speed to which regionalism 2 CEU eTD Collection disappeared after the participant countries became members of countries European NATO becamemembersof andthe the theparticipant disappeared after articles presenting various versions of this argument, see Lopandi argument, ofthis versions various presenting articles 4 reasons. political and legal for both structures largerEuropean wellinto the accommodate not would schemes asthese agreements, longer no wouldin regional beactive European states Central and East the institutions), (i.e. economic and political security through full participation into major Western werereached mainof countries these afterpolicy the targets foreign Many area. argued that Furthermore, post-Cold intergovernmental War regionalism be seemsto enduring inthe from disintegration civil state to fragmentation, ranging war. states, such as Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, experienced differentforms of multi-ethnic the of some In this process, 1991). (Offe processes nation-building incomplete of expression be the might considered that feature nationalist a problems, of deep-rooted liberalizing their(Dahrendorf markets 1990). In addition,face they needed to challenge the political their transform to only not had Europe Eastern and Central of countries the institutionsAmerica), andLatin in Europe South (i.e. of democratization waves previous the times. Unlike but also inrecent internal transitions most in complex the1990sfacedsomein of the aregion that to adopt (sometimesThe is process moreeven surprising knowing that these associative processeshave emerged radical)Central and East European states also engaged in regional arrangements among themselves. economicbilateral treaties, helped them normalize their relations with respect to minorities. Yet, all the reforms mostmembership organization of this of throughout of 1990s.These,aswellaseries the aiming at inConference Security for (CSCE) andand Co-Operation Europe restacquired the the in Europe firsthalf the had majority Alarge the of 1990s. been memberalready of the CentralMostmembership the Councilof states European acquireddid so. to and East This has been a recurrent argument especially in the second half of the 1990s. For an interesting collection of collection interesting an For 1990s. the of half second the in especially argument a recurrent been has This 3 4 However, none of the regional initiatives regional the of none However, ü (2002a). CEU eTD Collection few examples of such research. Rough examinations of mostvery the of of theone is post Cold(CEFTA), War regionalAgreement Trade Free European Central the of development the initiativeswhichDangerfield monographs are (2000), onthese treats quasi-inexistent. comprehensive topic, tothe dedicated scholarship academic theparticular Within regional the processes. evaluationsof fichesor chronological schematic on this subject is rather Coldtechnical, War regionalism in the area. This may partially explain why, to a large extent, literature descriptive,andparticularly wasnot interestedinto anin-depth rigorous comparativeor policy analysis of post- oriented, arrangements regional specific on briefings policy andfrom emerged it of Much limited scarce. still is to more or less in aslightly despite it interest increased topicthe sincethemidto dedicated 1990s,research and frequently tackled been not has regionalism European East and Central of subject The Current state of research and hypotheses being This self-evident. investigates dissertation this puzzle. farfrom theendWarsince Cold Europe of the are Central Eastern and spreadthroughout has regionalism international which for reasons The nothing? rather something isthere why Yet, level in area. atregional this attitude anon-cooperative would rather suggested Europe have and Eastern Central in political of happenedthe although world.circumstances the This environments regionalist dynamic most the of one and initiatives intergovernmental regional asignificantnumber of generated that of regional one framework cooperation, achoice least at into involved countries all these regimes, communist their of fall the after short, In reform aimingprocess atmaking them more efficientin theiraddressing goals. a profound into embarked haverecently processes European regional and East Central most whosemembers EUandNATO allgranted Group, membership. were Furthermore, Union. This did not happen even in the cases of the Baltic Cooperation and the Visegrád 4 CEU eTD Collection there is no common view on what exactly labels such as Central Europe or Eastern Europe Eastern or labelsEurope is view such as Central exactly on there what nocommon factthat the despite in studies, never these defined are almost of region the characteristics the or limits The example. for regionalism, European Central of instances being as aresimply considered arrangements chosen A series randomly of arbitrary. is often general in andtheresearchspace initiatives all literature, choiceof the regional Throughout this emphasizing the security dimension, even when this is less visible. several organizations, of chronologies well-organized mainly are articles 1999a) butthe (Cottey Institute of the Andrew theframework EastWest within edited prestigious Cottey that volume the is scrutiny under initiatives regional of range of terms in contribution notable Another arrangements. regional these of some of activities and objectives evolution, the multilateral cooperation in andincentives obstacles the summary of aninteresting heprovides of organizations, these in the Balkans, documents official and career from his diplomatic information as aswell sources, secondary as well as a comprehensiveof the descriptionmajor of contemporarythe regional initiatives that emerged in the area. Using mainly the Yugoslav government, Lopandi fortherelationFormer inpublication with the thechief-negotiator European topic.Union on initiatives inSouth Eastern Europe in journals such as initiatives in can Central and Eastern Europe befound also in anumberof articles published Papers ELIAMEP –the for Hellenic Foundation European and Foreign Policy Studies) Europe, South Eastern Europe). This is the case, forinstance, of Duško Lopandi summarizing the historical to limited evolution usually are dimension of a comparative regionalinclude that analyses cooperation existing few The in a certain space (e.g. Central (Hans Böckler Stiftung). (European Union Institute for Union Security (European Studies)Institute and Journal of South East EuropeanandBlackSeaStudies Journal ofSouthEast ü reviews the main historical events in the development (2001),which is currently mostthe comprehensive 5 South-East Europe South-East Review (Routledge for ü ’s , Chaillot Regional CEU eTD Collection although the conference took place five years after the creation of SECI. of five theyears creation the place after took the conference although Balkan Balkan inregional thatappear organizations volumethe (Mini inincluded of the evaluations and not mentioned comparative the inthewas papers scarcely Initiative (SECI), which at least for thesignificantrole in Eastern Europe. South Instead, theSoutheastEuropean Cooperative sake of the namea have not should did arrangement this havealthough (CEI) been Initiative European referredCentral the about to, was yielded a conference proceedings volume (Lopandi yielded proceedings a conference policythe implications intergovernmental of regional in Balkans. This cooperation the of Europewith debating purpose Eastern the from South academics andseveral initiatives post-communist regional of together key ofsome representatives the decision-makers, brought majorin conference Forexample,2001a present. frequently are inconsistencies that is selection case approachingthe wayof of this Aconsequence academicinto scholarship. reproduced are sphere political the from elements ideological and commonplaces many how widely in by governments Czechoslovak,is and Hungarian Polish 1990. This the early the was used that of concept Europe Central arestrictive around mostly her develops analysis Furthermore, phenomenon. European Central exclusively an as regionalism post-communist of concept the useof political recent to the dedicated volume which in isacollective Bunce acontribution Instead, (1997), (SECI). Cooperative Initiative European Southeast and the (CEI) Initiative European Central the about read both may one regionalism European East South to dedicated book in a how is This regionalism. ColdWar of mappost offeracomprehensive to attempting while particular circumstance, of regionalism in theinstance, Lopandi For is accustomed. researcher aftermath the which to of environment theacademic and political the Kosovowithin classified are initiatives crisis and focusedrefer his to.research The usual (implicit)around thisselection criterion is the way in which the respective regional 6 ü (2001) wrote in the context of of a resurgence in context wrote the (2001) ü 2002a) where there are lengthy lengthy inputs are there 2002a)where Mitteleuropa ü 2002,Lopandi , tends to treat to , tends ü 2002b), CEU eTD Collection of necessary historical circumstances. The similarity For is problematic. also argument similarity The circumstances. historical of necessary regionalism is a static phenomenon,sensitivities slightly anhistorical and for this nor anyone else inthis particular scholarship an provides and,account built thesedifferent around reason at the samethe readertime, the ofproduct thisregionalism literature may is beleft sensitive withnotdo have anequal at everyinput in point time.instances Therefore, different if the toimpression different thatdegreesexist may one that factors infer the suchfluctuations, Since despite theto initiative continued to such factors. However, leaders of some membercountries raised sensitivequestions for the (Cottey others 1999b). neither Bunce its the with after disintegration early times several initiative beingthreatened 1990s, the has case leadershiponlythe of beenmanifested in the commitment Visegrád Group the the even in in place.first Furthermore, there is the regional no commitment, grouping political minimal Without cooperation. of is aprecondition commitment leadership Similarly, regionalism. of case particular any explain cannot but regionalism of cases all explain may involving in intergovernmental regional initiatives. To put it differently, geopolitical location explanation has several drawbacks. Geopolitical location is an obvious factor for all states This (Bunce1997). circumstances and economic political of domestic similarities the as Union, incentivesby aswell offered the European commitment, the leadership states, the member the of location geopolitical the are These inCentral Europe. cooperation regional Visegrád Group (V4), she proposes a list of factors that could explain the development of the thecaseof around argument her Building Bunce. wasValerie regionalism international communistcomplexput forwardamorepost narrativepuzzle. Among first about to the a path.Existing forscholarship understanding several however, tracks offers, possible this regional level, historical although and political circumstances would nothave suggested such of at becomecooperation have involvedinframeworks formerthe democracies communist howall understand to attempted explicitly has of research, none the nature of the Irrespective 7 CEU eTD Collection and self-image constructions,interdependence, external push andidentity expressedpolitics as for Europeannessa quest the last twosuggests that Southfactors East European regionalism would be the resultbeing of regional functional the in Bechev Bosnia. of war the intheaftermath most regionalism Balkan of dynamic particular significant. Furthermore,understand formeris the although thespecific aim to study space,the communist of inthe international issue the regionalism treats of research that most comparative advanced Universitythe by Bulgarian Oxford of DimitarThisisscholar far Bechev (2005). so the residual isproducts inexplored much indetail a doctoral dissertation defended recently at 2002, Anastasakis andBoji haveacquire membership states European to the Union madeto (Uvali European East South that the attempts productof the is a residual regionalism international that view the share supporters its all idea, this of variants many are there Though in focused Balkans. the on research particularly been intheliterature, emphasized often has space formerin communist the regionalism in fostering Union European the The of role investigated. be impact of European Union to remains European the Therefore,regionalism. only the East and Central caseof the is not this mentioned, asalready but, overlap not should several If centuries. then wastrue, this some groupingsonly be would these possible and postcommunist,impossible traceitpreviousisand it back to less to decades and even to former communist countries. However, as I showin chapter 4, this similarity is recent, rather other the than advanced more economically were countries andthese leadership political in of terms similarities wereseveral there Slovakia) Republic and Czech 1993the after (i.e.Hungary, Poland andCzechoslovakia and Visegrádgroup amongthe membersof the in that is true early century.1990s, the It backfar asthe fourteenth as backgrounds dating in Bunce, particularthe V4,thiswouldbe caseof the historical bysimilar caused partially þLü -Dželilovi ü 2002). This hypothesis of 2002).This hypothesis EU conditionality of and 8 ü 2002, Anastasakis 2002, CEU eTD Collection review of these discussions, see the contributions to Gaonkar (2001). Gaonkar to contributions the see discussions, of these review 5 discursive level. However,it implicitly shares the view that modernization takes place also at Bechev’s view ismodernization Westernizationof version, a diluted addressingmostly the historical period. of irrespective the aremostly samerather the states and these development in of terms others behind always willremain some states that itsuggests form, extreme an In free will. and change of question the properly accommodate not does which relations, human of vision deterministic and an evolutionary into isembedded paradigm This weight. has ideological variant, an in its Westernization particularly paradigm, modernization itaround ideological.partly framing postCold Similarly, into Warregionalism the builtmakes narratives all postulated.This be butonly observed cannot as interdependence concept, ideological an israther interdependence in 2, later chapter asIshow Furthermore, 1999). Cooperation Economic(Pavliuk Black the Sea or Cooperation (Cottey 1999b), A.(Rupnik theVisegrád 2002), (Bunce1997,Dangerfield Group Balticthe 2000), 2005, 23), is hardlyadopted visible by major in the For instance,outside external push,case namely those “strategies for promoting of regional actors cooperationthe creation suchenlargement. Some of the factors proposed by Bechev are also difficultas tofind in other cases. theof theEU andCentral Economic Cooperation Organization (BSEC) havebeenits onlyremotely linked tothe EU members, European US, Initiative Moreover, initiativesSea Blackformer such as the (1994-1995). countries communist NATO” (Bechev and membership first submission accession the (1993) before EU of bythe applications the further criteria its for Union adopted before European the created space were communist formerin thatemerged the arrangements Around half regional the entireof region. the to generalized be easily cannot hypothesis residuals and conditionality EU the However, of import institutionsWestern (Bechev 2005). regional cooperation should also be seen as a new episode of modernization through the This argument This against modernizationthe paradigm hasbeen discusseddetail various in in places.a good For 9 5 CEU eTD Collection norm nor the most important factor for the entire universe of post Cold War regionalism. international actorsis involvementof words,although there direct Inother organizations. within ownership these external to the regionfeelingof be awidespread seemto andthere schemes cooperation regional European in some of the arrangements, majority East Central of and the the initiated countries former communist Furthermore, this is neither Europe. forEastern South Pact intheStability participate states memberEU and non–EU the both as aswell organizations, international several Federation, Russian the Canada, Japan, The US, arrangement. forthis financial assistance and providedadministrative Europe for Commission Economic Nations United the and (SECI) Initiative Cooperative European communistformer in the regionalism supported that actor external only the not was it space.However, The agreements. Dayton/Paris after the Europe Eastern inSouth USparticularly in area, actors the government, other than present more been has Union European the that find I literature, the in frequently for instance,alternative view,inwhich Union roleAsthe of isless relevant. out European the pointed was for this suggests dissertation At fieldwork an samethe the evidencefrom the time, the initiatordifficulty. with offer could of the Southeast integration modernization factpossibility and interdependence/ grills the change, a of that more easily worldviews thataccommodate the inclined more towards Personally,one. Iam anepistemological less and choice is a personal approaches, less deterministic for option the like them, for opting and discipline in the established well are paradigms modernization and interdependence the shortcomings, such Despite Cooperation. Balkan 1980s late the as such regionalism, of forms previous identify may one regionalism, international European even inYet, at discursivelevel.East world institutional both the caseof and South the War regionalism wouldbe arecent 1989)(i.e. import post from Westernthe democratic institutional level, where regionalism would be such institution. In other words, post Cold 10 CEU eTD Collection framed as a space of common memory and action. In other regional identity.words, This isnotamere geographical location butit reference to is explicitly regionalism is politically invoke frequently of aparticular very much organizations official the the documents of well as as actions, political level. These sub-governmental at much cooperation generated not have they and political been have groupings these of actions the of majority large The present. element only the been have not may conditionality democratic Nonetheless, ( international relations sphere of in process the of a democratization the maybeproduct residual regionalism regardedas European Central East and In short, context. thedemocratization remains regionalism international theparticularity this case of of viewpoint, from framedadaptation a security be can arrangement international any Since conditionality. EU the not but environment tothenewsecurity andthe adaptation be process democratization the seemsto regionalism for post ColdEuropean thecreation of andand War denominator Central East evolution common the Therefore, area. the of arrangements intergovernmental regional the scale to and EastEuropean states’ foreign policy it options, beenhas not toasignificanttransferred Central the of formulation in the role a played conditionality EU Although Yugoslavia. of disintegration the and the system bipolar of bythe collapse generated uncertainties security political with the cope asto well as cooperation, through credentials their democratic NATO membership was possible,or EU the whether answer offered werenot aclear states these when in the early 1990s, regionalism was a meanswhich European the Union and NATOhave beenconsidered the most important. Especially to prove the Western goal.partners Thisstrategy includesalso acquiring membership major institutions,Western to among governments seem to have into European thedemocraticstates and East community.The Central participant framed regionalism “reintegration”the At level,discursive of most groupings regional the of refer to the as part of a larger strategy to achieve this democratic hypothesis conditionality 11 ). CEU eTD Collection short, post Cold War Central thathad In significantly initiatives transformed. regional the political generated contexts and East European the even after mental map continues place collective onthe for abetter competition the regionalism has of rhetoric and Interestingly,Nordic action process andScandinavian horizons. this political not been only a residual goal identity successof was achieved,the faced Baltic the brand competition the of the from hinterland politically this once republics Russian level three the the but, at symbolic encouraged the creation identity Balticof brand.a stronger helped This differentiate case of the the In action. Baltic rhetoric of logics the by affected been have these even Yet, brand. group,regional for instance, of the usefulness the to sensitive been less have Black Sea, or Baltic suchasthe concepts, external parties, and marginal those identity with Balkans.associated the as Central regional Instead, Europe especially the have heavy regional weighted with long-established, been identity such concepts associated United States, that initiatives of case in the present mostly was It region. the havethroughout spread equally been hasnot however, The race, War. Coldthe bythelogic blurred of or empty previously mapEurope, and of Eastern mental Central spaceon a relatively collective the unique Both to groupings and theirmembers, this type of community. democratic aspartof the be recognized in to attempt mental the spaces better connotations. In this sense, negativehasmany which is which “Balkans,” as more neutral perceived than the post Cold War regionalism connotations “South Europe,” Eastern has better “Central ingeneral than instance, Europe” has been also a race havehistory a highembedded normative with elementsin each For relation to other. to appropriate previous identity regional or“Balkans,” such “Central representations, as which Europe” by rely heavily on identities generated communities regional these the identities. However, also developed among these consequently andcommunities regional among different acompetition Intheprocess, friendship communities. of astheresult particular represented 12 rhetoric action offered more visibility and CEU eTD Collection 6 political actions and processes have not only a material but also a normative-representational also but only nota material have andprocesses actions political conceptualized outside identity (Hopf 1998, Wendt 1999, Guzzini In other2000). words,all be cannot interaction and action political First, positions. mainstream the of rest the from different are that interaction international) (and political about propositions several constructivism isessentially a social not only a political theory it(Wendt 1999), supports constructivism). (social approach conventional the to is closest it area, diverse The epistemological foundationsThe social construction ofinternational regionalism of this research are constructivist and, within conditions. this rich and intergovernmental initiatives, underpinnedby a historical account of their constitutive theoreticallyimportant framedmost Central monograph andregional of the EastEuropean Cold War Central and East European regionalism. post case conceptusingtheparticular of identifying of this possiblethe research dimensions At the same time, it aims at producingregional cohesiveness. For this reason, the dissertation a is mainly a prospective one, aiming at regionalism, further which I develop particularly introduction the of through concept the of methodological andframeworks of social conceptual constructivism international and East European intergovernmental regional initiatives.this Iuse For the purpose, action In investigate this I dissertation, this of hypothesis Conceptual and methodological framework identity regional formation. and level international at legitimization political of processes continuous and the achannel of aproduct also butin area the processes of democratization the product The variants and features of constructivism are presented in more detail in chapter 2. chapter in detail more in presented are ofconstructivism features and variants The through a comparative analysis of the creation and evolution of the major Central and major Central the andof evolution creation the of analysis acomparative through 13 democraticconditionalityandrhetoric 6 Although CEU eTD Collection falsifiable. As an alternative forproducing anarrative about way the regional form groupings words, interdependence arenot other In concepts integration postulated. the of and regional only but observed be cannot interdependence and integration regional both because importantly most problematic, rather are interdependence of and embeddedconcept the in as integration 1,the integration.I furtherparadigm argue chapter Yet, leads to cooperation ultimately, vision supports that, the literature regionalist camp,current the irrespective of makes itmore radical than conventional social constructivism can digest. Furthermore, 2003, 2005).However, atacloser look, theNRA/T hasanimportant critical agenda that NewRegionalthe asthemost advanced Approach/Theory (NRA/T) (Hettne inthis respect arguments. Some attempts to import constructivist elements are increasingly frequent, with (neo)Marxian and (neo)realist mostly by (neo)liberal, hasbeen dominated literature 1,regional intergovernmental thisinAs is dissertation chapter Ishow cooperation grounded. which in tradition research major next the is which scholarship, regionalism international is significantly penetrated Social hasparadigm arelatively and it constructivism not recent (Guzzini 2000). andinteraction interest iscreated developed through for constructivists, Instead, interaction. to exogenous interests, a politicaland process their to participants of configuration the exclusively by are dictated of participants action forchoice whichthe possibilities models particular (identity) histories of participants. This denies the essence of the dominant rational interaction but depend also of political of notthe specific does onthe context exclusively identity mediationwithout the 1992, 1999).Toputitdifferently,(Wendtof action political information in political interest. interestgenerates Although action,isinterestnot possible is butthispolitical byrationality action in mostly characterized resides transforming reflection on actionsofselfprevious there isfurtherand others, no action. Inthissense, minimal Without formation. meaning by mediated is action political Second, dimension. 14 CEU eTD Collection discourse discourse theory First,(Torfing thereis 2005,5-9). inspired theabove-mentioned strategy, asJacob be can fact, paradigm. views alternative identifiedTorfing in argues, three In Though is this a major discourse,it approach to is neither the onlyonenor dominant the analysis. conversation and analysis content as such materials, 6). In methodological terms, this involves the use of specific tools for the analysis of concern languagewith written and“the semantic aspectsof writtenspoken or text” (Torfing 2005, viewpoint, discourseindicatesphilological analysis ones.From aprimary academic this newspaper a or leader, a political speechof article.broadcasted people, a two between conversation a instance It may for act, speech a particular means commonly discourse sense, an academic message. In also refera totransmit inorder for anaudience perform actor a political a that text refers to discourse to a type of lay of From viewpoint uses, mean.the text discourse, talkfirst and what understand jargon, suchunderstandtalk (Tonkiss To andtexts” 1998,246). one to concern needstherefore this as the legal, is with through meaning of production the concerned that bemay asa“research described medical or analysis mostly As discourse associal approach, alargemethodological understood practice. is discourse analysis, where of discourse framework ituses themethodological methods, Mainly this due to conceptual dissertation issetting, the a prospective one.In terms of Methodological approach constructivism to international regionalism in a less critical way than the NRA/T does. social of introduce aimingframework this thus regional to newlyestablishedcohesiveness, perspective. Then, in of andfrom from constructivist a social region concept the field of starting regionalism, the remainder of the represent themselves asagroup dissertation, the argumentation develops within the 2Iproposetheand concept evolvein overtime, chapter of regional as cohesiveness, defined degree whichto a group ofactorsinhabitingalimitedcontiguousspace actand group . In order to build this new concept, I first reconstruct the 15 CEU eTD Collection 9). In fact, the methodological differences between these last two generations of generationsdiscourse of two last these between differences methodological In fact, the 9). is betweenbutnon-discursive distinction the abandoned (Torfing discursivethe and 2005, vision, see the lengthy introduction to the authoritative English editionof Derrida’s which in the way difficultof the translation discussion of Derrida’sinteresting an work For into world. English real the led in to point several significant reference objective misunderstandings no is there other, of each his a closertranslation is “there is no outside text”, whichmeans that once reality discourseand mutually construct 7 8 1997). concerned, methodologically most Laclau areamong the andMouffe in camp, Chantal Ernesto which The Derriderian materials such as speeches, interviews andto historical reports, ideas events, andinstitutions. they use a wide through analysisthe at relations of power setthe instituted discursivelevel.For this purpose, of raw empirical(neo)Marxian inspiration,identifying aims at thesources of relationspower society within data ranging2003). Theirisby approach, which fertilized several also of theories Marxist and from commonWodak Weiss G.and Wodak andMeyer2001, 1989, Wodak (Wodak 1989, 1995)andRuth written or spokenof critical discourse analysis, most notably through thetext work Norman Fairclough (Fairclough framework methodological the generated strand Foucault-inspired the research, In political (Derrida 1967). text” the outside nothing is “there sense, this In other. each constitute mutually discourse social and reality viewpoint, From this it entire butis realm. tothe social extended analysis isThis argument of by sharedalso thirdthe representatives the generation of discourse non-linguistic linguistic as forms and and discursive data (Howarth Stavrakakis 2000,4). analysing aims at that approach large methodological is analysis a whilediscourse practices, social of interms isdefined discourse approach, this alternative of representatives the andview between Intheparticularly readingof power relation knowledge. around onthe his analysis someof around evolved discourse research of main ideas of the Foucault, Michel mainly from languagesocio-linguistics, whichtreats as a textual A unit. generation second Thisis originalhow the French version “iln’y de a rien hors-texte” has beenmost often translated.However, See for instance Seefor Laclau and Mouffe (1985). 7 8 has similar goals, aswell frequentas influences, (neo)Marxian 16 Of grammatology (Spivak CEU eTD Collection political phenomenon of international regionalism. In line with the constructivist logic,internationalpolitical In line the constructivist phenomenonof this regionalism. with Figure 1on nextthe page is avisual way Istructure the of discursivethe spacethe of 1969). method (Foucault of archaeological Michel Foucault this sense, the methodological around In political this phenomenon. the and structure discourse of context, construction the the as well as approach structures, certain into cooperation intergovernmental regional of ofdevelopment this dissertation isidentifying legitimizing isthe space creation for arguments raw empirical of data and used closest but not equal identity legacies institutionsand related toCentral and EastEuropean regionalism. This to the and interviews, as well as other empirical data of non-linguistic nature, such as events, ideas, explanation of this phenomenon, Iemploy written or spoken text, such as official documents and development of this particular case of international regionalism. In order to articulate an understand to rather but certain and material institutes of power discursive relations intergovernmental cooperation offer a critique criticalof the agenda way and in is notwhich rooted manifestpower structures the meanings, throughout dissertationhave the of not does a in theany way universe of intorelations different a that (neo)Marxianview the share I Although be thought. not could of reality which tradition.Central I do notand aim to East both at materiallevel, ofmeaning discursive human agency and structures outof develops European regional interaction, through that in sense the meaningful, They are of discourse. areobjects actions human and all Therefore, objects mutually constituted. are discourse andsocial reality that In this dissertation, inline with the second and third generation of discourse theory, Iassume deconstruction. of method Derriderian the or methods genealogical and archaeological Foucauldian the on instance, for can draw, frameworks ontological variousapart groups(Howarthand Stavrakakis 2000,4-5).Researchinboth these set conceptual andpedigrees intellectual different small the analysisin areand rather general how different structures of meaning have allowed the emergence 17 CEU eTD Collection Fig. 1Strata ofmeaning production Eastern Europe. and asCentral space delimited the within (mostly) of regions representations collective identity namely palimpsests, overlapping those through andfrequently cross-hybridizing regional various through identifiable is stratum background the dimension, representational normative- the On dynamics. and characteristics their at look I did, they case In War. Cold the before area in the developed cooperation intergovernmental regional whether European regionalism, inidentify order to presencethe of investigate layerfirstthis I identifiable political-institutional legacies. In specificthe case of through Central and East leveldeepest is background stratum. On the institutional is stratum the this dimension, ofmeaning builtAtisthe Each dimensions strata production.successive through of these one. and anormative-representational dimension a material space hasboth (institutional) 18 CEU eTD Collection and mechanisms of causality within the social realm may be an unfruitful In this mechanismsendeavour. maybeanunfruitful and thecausality within social of realm interaction in the of essence physicalthe from different be may interaction world. social of essence the because Frombut knowledge this perspective, any attempt to uncoverlimitsdue in to the ofhuman This happensnot traced natural (Dilthey the 1991). world social laws be in in can which expectthese find asimilarway not connections to causal live may one sciences. In this, I agree with Wilhelm Dilthey that in the complex social reality in which we thenatural to assimilar social sciences of treatment positivist share notitdoes the that in sense the interpretativist researchis the anyone. sametime, Atthe to accessible methods shared commonly through to research is transparent The world be needs discovered. to that Furthermore, itnotholddoes theisthere viewthat a in hidden sense of thingsthe order the which normal isfounded,science particularly principlethe of excludedthe third. in thatit accepts most of the principles of normal science or ratheris rationalist It the principlesallegiances. of logicinterpretativist on and rationalist/positivist both holds approach This follows. cohesiveness structure,world. This strata which in chapter2is developed inthecontext of regional the concept,external the to themselves represent they how and act groupings regional the how investigate also represents Finally,lastisgroup. hereinstitutional and stratum of practices that I discursive and the the the structureway the participants to a regional arrangement defineto themselves respect forwith themselves and as design) a (institutional level institutional at both assessed be can this that and theinitiatives regional of design specific of isthat stratum argumentation next The evolution. and creation this of context larger socio-political the investigate I dimension, normative-representational the of the thesis On in area. the regionalism international of evolution and creation the ledto that requisites one, I frame the research within the security paradigm and therefore Iinvestigate the security institutional the On dimensions. two similarly has it and context of isthat stratum next The 19 CEU eTD Collection framework for explaining events. The notion of causality adds to this order the idea of correlation and thus provides the of an order establishes the of excludedthird imply principle The the causality. necessarily not notion intheprinciple this does of be and precedence embedded through the done can myview,this In strategy. an interpretativist also to be it accommodated can words, other limited explanatory is the approach. In it, to not third theprincipleof excluded the without for the paradigm of explanation. However, although explanation could not be conceptualised principle of excludedthe is third key for notion the of iscausality, which the central concept Due toits embedded time dimension and(A non A becan not true (Rorty 1982, 198-203). position of alternative adoption the asthe be would as valid one “correct” the choice as to interpretation. Yet, this couldnot be but a personal choice and any attempt toimpose such is it than explanation to suited less is probably regionalism, international as such phenomena political) subsequently (and social large-scale complex or to respect with particularly research, social reason, this For less common. regularities and frequent more probably from social world asdifferent isconceptualized natural be may the world, paradoxes the of nature the When study. of objects our understanding for chosen is strategy which be regardedas categories of 1982,191-98),understanding (Rorty itis only a matter of choice than status as knowledge categories and neither of them should be regarded as more appropriate for knowledge for appropriate more as purposes. beregarded should of them neither and categories knowledge as status Although the principle of excluded ismore the third frequently the paradox,applicable than they have equal paradox. Therefore, the principle of like paradoxexcluded the the isacategory third, of discourse not of reality. 9 particular viewpoint, the aim socialof (and political) research should be to of discourse), not sense,merely is principle of (and the excludedthirdthe therefore a principle of knowledge a principle that is embedded in the social or natural reality. When this principle cannot be applied to describe a social or natural phenomenon, one may talk about a explain social (and political) phenomena. Since both explanation and interpretation may interpretation and explanation both Since phenomena. political) (and social why things happened the way they did. However, the notion of notion the However, did. they way the happened things 20 simultaneously understand 9 From this rather ), the ), CEU eTD Collection In this dissertation, I investigate excluded thirdis fundamental also tointerpretativist approaches. understanding, only the notion of precedence isnecessary. Consequently, the principle of the of purpose for the However, investigation. of subject for aparticular narrative acoherent to offer attempt both as they coin same faces the of different asthe regarded organizations and processes developed in Central in Europe (1) atgovernmental and Eastern developed Central andprocesses organizations regional arethe these develops, which research the casesaround the As regards of Units analysis and caseselection knowledgepresupposes. tool much intertwined to attempt aretoo in interactions the which process from of a complex perspective the relationship but to represent a causal into framed andmechanisms arenot them thefactors However, paradigm. explanatory the into the linear structure andregionalism. my EastEuropean In approach sense, has many this with common points that causality Central of case inthe play at cohesiveness regional mechanisms of and factors the abstract as a I dissonance and resonance of elements such from Furthermore, caesura. and continuity, similarity, of recurrence, points identifies the It events. the mereof not description is narrative This initiatives. intergovernmental regional of framework the within interactions foreign policy major has become a cooperation choice intergovernmental regional wayinwhich on the narrative for the governmentscohesiveness in the uncoverarea, the causes of international regionalismbased or toas offer an explanatorywell model of regional onas phenomenon in Cold onWar Central post doTherefore, I notaimand Eastern Europe. either to the the dynamicCentral of theand East European experience. Instead, I provide a as legitimate the as isThis anendeavour understanding process may uncovering at understandingaim process The phenomenon. political) (and a social understanding for choice optional is an correlation how international has become international awidespread regionalism 21 why how attempts. Infact, attempts. things came to happen the way they did. how and why may be how CEU eTD Collection for instancefor Wolff L.(1994) and Todorova (1997). 10 simultaneously for a particular pointin time. Therefore, the bordersconventions. of regions are moretraditional or less or more rather but idea “organic” regions or the areno“natural” there that supported increasingly disciplines scholars from other Later, arbitrary. andanylimitis necessarily an construct in fact artificial century, in history studies geography,and political economy haveshown is every region that minimum degree ofobjectively delimit regions,similaritynamely decideto which elements are significant and which is the that triesto one when controversial becomes notion meaning, the abstract straightforward may qualify relatively this Despite similar. highly are elements constitutive whose a a space to refers space that as a region.boundaries of the region.Since Almost without exception, “region” is formost disciplines anotion the early forenough settingspecifying the not whicharethewithout criteria These are delimitations 19 such for arrangements theOrganization Securityas inand Co-Operation (OSCE). Europe they aim explicitly fosterto the advancement of this particular region. This excludes regionalif only chosen are Cases Europe. Eastern and Central on focus explicit of clause additional Coldthe may be This membershipcriterion refined with War. further of introduction the the before endof states the European andby Western was created developed cooperation that formerthe a countries communist regionalacquired membershipto framework of in which (NATO), Organization Atlantic Treaty North andthe Union theEuropean Europe, regional level mainly with older democracies. It also excludes cases, such as the Council of at in country communistcooperation which cooperates intergovernmental former one regional of instances those excludes This arrangements. since respective the of creation the countries communist former majority in been have members the which in initiatives the only relevance membership.to isThisdissertation refers of criterion that rough level; (2) in the aftermath of the Cold War; and (3) that are the most relevant for the area. A Forrecent and influential argumentationon this topic with applicability to Central and Eastern Europe, see 22 10 Different conventions can be present can conventions Different th CEU eTD Collection half of the 19 second the since been haveresurrected or emerged that states those it to refers Therefore, political culture. isheavilyembeddedinto the of progress their source isthe Western world the in ideathat the but fate which political their freely always chose not could history asa understood is more ageographicalnotion,andIn Eastern Europe dissertation, than Central this the regions. In short, “region” is a notion of time as it is of space. less fluid at any time. Furthermore, since conventions change over time, so are the limits of NATO. acquiringthrough Western membershipto institutions suchas the Union European and andprocess havejoining consequently the restof aimedat democraticthe community defined asthespace embarkeda countriesinto of that profoundthose democratization share the same type ofbecause they Latvia andLithuania) (Estonia, republics Baltic addthethree partially may memory. In short, after one andSerbia).Tothese, Montenegro, republics of separate andfinally the Montenegro, 1990, Central and and Serbia of Yugoslavia/Union Republic of Federal the Slovenia, RepublicMacedonia, of Eastern Europe may be (Bosnia its Former states successor the Yugoslavia and Yugoslav Croatia, andHerzegovina, Romania, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia), and CzechRepublic (the states its successor and Czechoslovakia Bulgaria, areAlbania, states Union. These members Soviet the been of not thathave countries communist former bedefinedasall the Cold may post Warperiod for the Central Europe and Eastern power. Aroughproxy of satellite of Soviet the countries European the to refers Europe and Eastern Central War, World Second the After Europe. Western spaceand Soviet lessbetweenthe abuffer zone or more region the was period, Interwar the time.During areaatthat the dominated that from empires three the minorities th century as a consequence of the nation-building processes of of ethnic the nation-building processes of the aconsequence as century space of memory of space . It refers to those European states that in their recent in their that states European those refers to It . 23 CEU eTD Collection BSEC, CEI, DCP, SECI, SEECP and V4. BC, the namely region the on is truly focus whose initiatives seven other the on only mostly focuses analysis the However, Europe. Eastern and Central in cooperation intergovernmental WarCold regional of post milestones historical the presents that inpart the detail in more treated are cases special these All assessed. be suitably to creation much recent communist regionalism (Bechev 2005). As for the Regional Cooperation Council, itis a too strategiescope to with the uncertainties present atits borders than proper instances formerof Union European as rather can beregarded Pact Stability andthe Process Royaumont the asBechev 2007 with Furthermore, Council. Cooperation convincingly Regional the argues, which in replaced wasalso Europe, Eastern for South into Stability the Pact incorporated were its principles of some existafter ceasedto Process Royaumont The treaties. itin founding the referencesto despite Europe, Central Eastern and not and Mediterranean Slovenia in through incorporation the mostly of Croatiafocuses also 2000, the on betweenAustria, Italy cooperation and from evolved Quadragonale,a trilateral which the Similarly, space. communist former the to specific problems address not does itspace and Mediterranean majorisapartof the rather horizon Its criteria. focus regional the butpartially only criterion membership the satisfies Initiative (2002) Adriatic-Ionian recent instance, the For inthis dissertation. length at all aretreated of not these However, and (V4). Europe theforEastern Stability Visegrád the Group Process (SEECP), South Pact Cooperation EastEuropean South the (SECI), Cooperative Initiative European Southeast Cooperation (Q4), the Regional Cooperation Council (RCC), the Royaumont Process, the Quadragonal the (DCP), Cooperation Process Danube the (CEI), Initiative European Baltic the (AII), Initiative theCooperation Adriatic-Ionian Theseare War period. in post-Cold identified the be can initiatives intergovernmental almostof adozen inmind, regional With criteria these (BC), the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC), the Central 24 CEU eTD Collection regime, also seemed to be embarking on a similar path. onasimilar beembarking to seemed also regime, regime change. Atthat time, Yugoslavia, whichwithin the communist camp has had aslightly more liberal November1989, when the agreement was signed, Hungary was in the middle of its institutional process of 12 related time frame is includedchapter in 4. 11 process. from states bloc hadalready participant Eastern a democratization the upon embarked before this 1990.However, inemerged only before, shortly November 1989,when the Quadrilateral Cooperation,later known as the Central European Initiative (CEI), was created democratizationauthoritarian is establish which a rule, to criterion rough beginning the of the region process.organized much andforsome,earlier even earlier. their Only phasesfirst of the rapid disintegration of the communist regimes could be placedleast at one year freeone electionsisis limit It theconventional thethat first beginningof period. true post-communist the of the afterregionalIn terms of limits,temporal theformal frametime of researchthe is 1990-2007. The inferior almost half arrangementsa century of totalitarian under and scrutiny, the 2007 is2007 limitstate aconvenient to transitionthat ended inmost of countries,these as well as inyears later, EUmembership three the Romania, Therefore, were granted which 2007. and with Bulgaria together NATO, joined fivecountries year,these Thesame Slovenia. with states fiveUnion,- Estonia,European and together Slovakia other Lithuania, Latvia, tothe NATO.In 2004,they were alsoadmitted to Hungary were admitted and Poland of Thishappened institutions. Czech democratic the inthree stages.In Republic,1999, the consolidation degreeof the to references include specific criteria because the acceptance EU, proxy is the admittance of these countries in theWestern institutions, such as the NATO and A conventional pace. had adifferent has each country (2) levels; and different at process is acontinuous assess because (1) democratization isto difficult This countries intheregion. Theparticipant countries in theQuadrilateral Cooperation Austria, were Hungary, Italy Yugoslavia.and In Amore detailed discussionof the reasons that led to the disintegrationof the communist regimes and the 12 The major criterion to establish the second limit is the end of transition for the 11 Nevertheless, only in 1990most countries in the 25 CEU eTD Collection identified throughout the world mainly from the 1930s onwards. briefly presents the main historical milestones of international regionalism as a phenomenon that canbe 13 but it sets the historical background as far as mid19 the backgroundas historical it but the sets period theInterwar backthan doesnot gofurther research the Europe, Eastern and Central Finally,identifyingforforms international previous the of regionalism developedin that frame. time possible longest in the ColdEuropean regionalism War Central and East forpost instancesof the observing Another important source related to the history and political goals of under organizations the political history source related of importantand goals tothe Another most minutes meetings of frequent andtypes of werethe press releases such documents. declarations, resolutions, charters, statements, founding treaties, The since their creation. have produced structures intergovernmental cooperation regional the that documents are the In terms of the type of first hand data used for analysis, the main sourcesSources of this dissertation Enlightenment. the or Ages Middle the developed Antiquity, inthe areaduring alliancesthat regional various tackle issueof the the not does dissertation for which this is reason War.This the World of First aftermath the the in only area in the emerged cooperation intergovernmental for initiatives regional globe, the in thishalf started period secondthe of 19 the scene. political the on major actors the havebecome states nation inwhich historical a period mainly recent to refers “modern” peace times, where intergovernmental iscooperation considered an essentially modern phenomenon occurring in regional scholarship, regionalism international most in like research, this In instances. historical recent only to restricted asacategory or historical cases large of domain cooperation. The notion could be understood either as a very general category applicable to a intergovernmental regional of definition the from derives it First, reasons. several by For a more detailed discussion of the modern character of regionalism, see Fawcett (1995). Chapter 1 also 26 th century. However, like everywhere around everywhere like However, century. th 13 century. This choice is motivated choice This century. For Central and Eastern Europe, CEU eTD Collection Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs Géza Jeszenszky, former Polish Minister of Foreign institutions. Interviews with conducted key several decision-makers, such as former foreign policy advisors from the member countries, the regional initiatives and other relevant with interviews politiciansof highlightly rankeddiplomats and andstructured bureaucrats, I conductedaseries decision-making Between 2008, to 2003 and frequently activities. close in people involved directly of and development creation the regional organizations, experience of both the formal and informal functioning of the process, I also contacted have direct and thesesources of understanding and coverage better ensure a to least, Not cooperation. intergovernmental international agenciesdonor involved intheprocesses of post-Cold Warregional the and missions UN bodies, EU as such region the for actors relevant other of documents official andother reports uses dissertation the addition, In affairs. foreign of ministries Ministers of programsForeign Affairs.of foreign mostEuropean East in notably regionalism, and topic on the Central produced relation or of These policy wereSuch isdata supplemented with thattheinstitutionsdocuments member of the states andavailable important buthadeach of I alsoForeign Ministry organizations thesupport Affairs. Romanian the of mostly declarationscontacted I documents, such For through available. easily not were they and research the for useful the of webPresidents, sitesmeetings agendas, and drafts beenhave plans couldof and development proposals very of the of minutes the Prime of some However, disadvantage. major a represent not did Ministersunavailability or their therefore for thetopic, relevant directly not are papers internal these majority of some of internalthe of documents organizationsthe publicly are not largeavailable. The collections of documents or on the official web sites of the institutions. For different reasons, in of could befound either Most leaders sources process. these of inthe involved political and interviews havenewspaper scrutiny declarations,keynotes opening beenthe speeches, 27 CEU eTD Collection process, regionalism, examiningI its legal nature, its featuresalso and the possibilities studyto them. In the propose international of specificities the investigate 3,I chapter In cohesiveness. regional a grillof theconcept alsogenerates reconstruction This of region. concept from the field starting of analysisreconstruct from a social constructivist perspective the concept of regionalism andits related forin 2,I Forthese reasons, chapter is by shortcomings. area epistemological characterized the institutionalshowing is that there frequent overlappingmuch andthat of academic scholarship in this concepts, related the and regionalism of notion the for literature in the existent meanings dimension aconstructivistregionalism from perspective of the builds part first regional the specifically, More Central European regionalism. to and East respect with ofmeaning production strata the investigate two other the while argumentation, the of foundations theoretical the downs The dissertation is divided into three parts, each containing three chapters. The firstlays part Overview of thethesis dissertation. the of end the at list reference in the included is informants and interviewees offer me background information as well as alternative accounts of the events. A list of these journalists) thatcould researchers, professors, (university informants with correspondence focused interviews all or Iaddedlightly in To structured involved process. the persons these, background aswell of the decision-making about the data projects implemented some useful non- about information development, in their points key some and creation structures regional of cooperation thecontext about information mostly collected I interviews, these From regionalism. European East and Central of development and emergence the Affairs,Foreign have been particularly in useful terms of providing hand first of accounts Bronis Affairs á aw Geremek and several former Romanian Prime Ministers and Ministers of Ministers and Ministers Prime Romanian former several and Geremek aw conceptual framework fortheanalysis ofinternational 28 . In the first Imapchapter, the various . In the CEU eTD Collection of post Cold War Central and East European regionalism. in articulate case specific practices the wayinternal investigating anddiscursive the rhetoric cohesiveness, regional of dimension discursive onthe focuses chapter last The comparison. in andgrills usingcohesiveness, 3and framework the designed across-sector chapter regional of dimension institutional the analyze I 8, chapter In evolved. has and emerged regionalism of case particular this which in circumstances policy foreign specific the identify part of the dissertation is dedicated to the to isdedicated dissertation the part of have Finally, foreign last strategies. and the policy states European their developed created developed in the area, with the purpose of defining the contextin which the Central and East has War regionalism Cold post in which context thepolitical of features the to dedicated is 6 Chapter and national the discourses. regional have affected way such processes well as atthe atsymbolic as level, been created have margins and centres way borders, the identity legacies that have developed looking inrelation with Central and Eastern Europe, at in this fieldthan assumed.5,Iexaminepreviously important Inchapter mostregional the development and variation more is there that demonstrating War, Cold the of end the before forms of intergovernmental regional cooperation in emergedthat Central and Eastern Europe I explore the 4, in chapter specifically, More developed. cooperation intergovernmental regional European andEast Central in contemporary which context socio-political the regional cohesiveness the investigates part Thesecond cohesiveness. , presenting the background stratum background , presenting the stratum meaning as as of production, well dynamics of regional cohesivenessdynamics of 29 historical of andpoliticalfoundations . In chapter 7, I CEU eTD Collection BUILDING FOR OF INTERNATIONAL A THE CONSTRUCTIVIST CONCEPTUAL PART 30 I REGIONALISM ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK CEU eTD Collection makes it unsuitable for exploring the case under scrutiny in this dissertation. which shortcoming hasanepistemological literature regionalist international traditions, various of irrespective the However, field. for the its high relevance which indicates fact a regionalism, international of development the as pace same the with relatively evolved in ithas interest academic that showing scholarship, relations international and science political of field the within area research specific as regionalism international examine understandingits conceptual field. That is why,in thirdthe last and partof chapter,the I to contribute could that elements than rather regionalism international of evolution a third probably undercooperation as a modern way.political phenomenon, which developed intotwo major waves,However, with these intergovernmental regional This portrays topic. the on empirical research the to dedicated are attributes thatin Ireview theliterature section, For this second the purpose, international regionalism. help describe the historical of concept the generated that phenomena political of the common features atthe look to place in a clear category. define and difficultto isboth regionalism international circumstances, Undersuch present. A possible solution inconceptual overlapping academic to and scholarship, showthat very andconfusion are often this problem is to take have concepts related its regionalism and notion of thatthe meanings the various investigate a step back and international regionalism (regional intergovernmentalof cooperation).treatment academic In and the openingevolution section,historical I the examine I chapter, first this In M C HAPTER APPING INTERNATIONAL REGIONALISM 1 31 CEU eTD Collection the large, continental-level arrangements like the ones mentioned above and the smaller the and above mentioned ones the like arrangements continental-level large, the between distinguish may one Sometimes, (CIS). States Independent of Community recent more or the (SEATO) Asia Treaty Organization late South-East the (NATO), Organization existence of In security studies and international scholarship,relations regionalism usually indicates the multilaterallevel. initiatives discursive political and at population, governed the and with its relations state of nature the on in research at also but studies, economy regional political and politics international security, level,in appear these commonly, Most research. fields of particular to attached loosely meanings such distinct several identify might as one that showing field, conceptual the the mapping of efforts North Atlanticmore rigorous Treatyway. In tomapthefield havein been many attempts there a not tracks, directions and overlapping this section, I present of research such despite a multitude Interestingly, integration. andproduce necessarily the strengths and Anotherweaknesses point of debate refers to the assumption that regional cooperation wouldof eventually the existing is, contested. however, globalization,this commonality produce regionalism that also could accompanying and is from deriving usually evidence increasing thereglobalization. Since phenomenon a as presented also been has regionalism decades, two last the In region. as to spacereferred placeetc.) political,phenomenon take inagiven(mental,would geographical respective the that ishave thecommon fact in to seem Whatall definitions authors. disciplineviewpoint, meaningsone would manydefinitions find certain or to particular from one only reading when basis.Even separatism ethnic on to arrangements international used in manydisciplinesmeanings, with ranging from different forpreference certain might currently stand for, the firstimpression would most probably be that of confusion. Itis Regionalism1.1 The universe of contemporary regionalism is an extremely elusive concept. If one browses through what regionalism 32 CEU eTD Collection social reaction to the alleged economic and cultural “homogenization” of (Hettne, world the of “homogenization” cultural and alleged economic the to social reaction and political interpretation, in a or, a more refined 1999), (Hveem economic globalization 1993, Pronk1998,EthierIn this reading, 2001). regionalism isoften reaction a political to (Bhagawati of globalization a competitor as hasconceptualized it been frequently, Most politics. or markets worldof theglobalization accompanying asaphenomenon portrayed regionalism isfrequently context, particular this In oreconomic regionalism. known astrade sometimes is regionalism of type this issues, trade with concern major its to Due interest. muchWorld by Tariffs and Organization then generated also (GATT) (WTO) the Trade international trade trade. The way in which haveregional arrangements affectedand impactand hadan on the system instituted ininternational EU’sincreasingrole EUandof duethe uniquetothe features the partially first by the General commonthe commercial policy of many European Union.the This happenedpartially due to Agreement to later and Community Economic European the to on granted been has Trade attention special field, and Within the perspective. from investigation particular beenthis of have thesubject instance, for (Comecon), Assistance for(EFTA) andthe nowdefunct Mutual Council Economic Agreement European Free Trade the (NAFTA), American Agreement FreeThe North Trade liberalization preferential (Bhagwati neighbouringtrade among states 1993,Ethier 2001). In political economy research, regionalism refers usually to preferential viewpoint. security from relevanta political active or trade agreements or kind of activity any have not do that arrangements regional for equally beyondbe employed could subregionalism the territoryas practice, political or discipline in the spread widely not is ofdistinction this theirUnfortunately, membership or simply andCottey Kearns1999a). 1999, (Hook cooperation subregional (intergovernmental) for as thosebe known may initiatives of type latter the that purpose, this For (ECOWAS). States areAfrican less ones, such as the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) or the Economic Community of West 33 CEU eTD Collection called paradiplomacy (Keating and Aldecoa 1999). Since local governments represent a represent governments Since local 1999). Aldecoa and (Keating called paradiplomacy recently been have belong they which to state national the of competences the beyond and individually governments local by taken actions The government. central the through not and theirlocal areas,may governments funding access directly from institutionssupranational funding theaccess thedevelopmentof Union.European of visible For within the through is particularly This government. central the with relations intheir autonomy more some gain reconstruction of roads. For more details on this topic, see the official website of the Council of Europe Council of the website (www.coe.int). official see the topic, this on details or more For building of roads. the or points reconstruction frontier of new opening the such issues, infrastructure on focus programs 15 often depictedis cause as a of and globalization (Mansfield initiatives and Milner 1997, Pronk 1998,regional Hettnefor 1999a, than 1999b). rather arrangements political or trade multilateral for preference the regionalism is also a strategy initially conceptualized asopposed to multilateralism. The latter refers mainly to 14 (Lopandi sometimes as trans-border regionalism, subregionalism and even sub-regional cooperation participate in common programs of development. border to tothe close and councils local governments of countries’ some these allows that arrangementwhich is framework a Euroregion, agree on a so-called creation the of the governments of two or for Under instance, initiativeat the of theaegisof organisation,this of Council morethe Europe. neighbouring countriesinmore tookplace Europe, neighbouringprojects these or Many countries. of border of two that have the to close provinces or cities a those common of councils or governments local the between frontier developed may is recenttypeof projects 1999).This Aldecoa arelatively and cooperation (Keating cross-border for asa synonym employed isincreasingly samethe At regionalism time, and Rosamond2002,Bøås,Marchand, andShaw 2005). Bøås,and Shaw1999,Breslin,phenomena Higgot, and(Payne Gamble 1996,Marchand, and concepts competing complementary than rather been considered have globalization Inotai, andSunkel 1999, Bøås2002). The first such arrangement was created in 1958 between Germany and the Netherlands. Usually, these Usually, Netherlands. the and Germany between 1958 in created was arrangement such first The This view of competing paradigms partially derived from thefact that, from a political economy viewpoint, ü 2001). The creation 2001).The creation regionalismof trans-border may allow local governments 14 More recently, however, regionalism and regionalism however, recently, More 34 15 This type of arrangement is designated CEU eTD Collection polity. Amore detailed definition of political elites is developed in chapter 2. 16 this does notthis mean belinked does not could regional that processofincreasing separatism tothe elite, a political through voices that, those foreground in the brings regionalism of particular type political holding elites Rather, official within governingthe structures. position this above,bottom-upUnlikelimited regionalism the this isnot briefly to presented process regionalism. asethnic known is phenomenon the case, common the is which element, ethnic When 1998, KeatingAldecoa 1999). claimsthe havea and regional dominantof separatism intellectual politicalmovementand/or bottom-up regional related to separatism (Keating administrative units andthe governed population, concept the of regionalism may toan refer its state, between the in relation the ininterested those particularly in studies, policy Finally, area within state. a nation regionalism, which is a category of regionalism as increase of autonomy of an administrative bottom-up is In this a (Harvie 1994). of sense, paradiplomacy regionalism category a bottom-up approach or a top-down irrespective whetherthrough province, autonomy a of administrative the increasing of process the to referring for used is sometimes regionalism attargeted aspecific territory nation the state.Inthesamewithin disciplinary context, is it while ingeneral situation second inthe state, a nation of administrativethe subunits of part largest a all mayitor case, affect first In the circumstances. setof regional particular usually an administrative procedure and may be the result of an administrative reform or of a isThis Lequesne1998). LeGalèsand 1998, a top-down approach state through (Keating autonomy the a processofincreasing within may Regionalism a province tothe refer also regionalism. asparadiplomacy becould designated autonomy increase of bottom-up of thisphenomenon state, of a region) area (a administrative certain Here, term the of political elite refers mainly to those elites that voice political claims, i.e. related to the 16 may coagulate an alternative view on the foundations of the nation-state. However, nation-state. the of foundations the view on analternative may coagulate 35 CEU eTD Collection complementing each other, with regionalization conceptualized as the process through which through asthe process with conceptualized regionalization complementing each other, also beyond this partially goes regionalization and betweenregionalism relation the more, even things complicate To overlapping synonymy. 1999b).Hettne Most importantly, phenomena geographical area,both alsoknown as regionalism 1995a, 1995b, (Hurrell the two terms can be ina particular integration of regional degree orthe initiatives numberthe regional of increasing of theprocess may designate equally regionalization of Yet, regionalism. concept toany is related autonomy andbestowal only rarely necessarily any involveof the not does European Union. In this sense, regionalization ismainly an administrative top-down process, the of programs cohesion andsocial economic as the of as well policy, regional the of evaluation and development elaboration, the for frameworks as function statistical which for purposes, mainly created personality, legal without units, territorial administrative non- are These regions. development into member states EU the of territory national of the communes, and city councils. In the same vein, regionalization may also refer to the division national lands,can be intointoterritory provinces, divided regions counties, or then the instance, For government. federal or central the to in relation decision-making of levels mayfollowmay not or it at linesofhistoricalis the provincesand different usual operated Such transformation 1998). 1997,Claval (Deyon forpurposes administrative smaller parts frequently employed for describing the of process national transforming the intoterritory known be sometimes may as state nation the of units regionalization political certain of autonomy the increasing of process to the related type itsregionalregionalism separatism,of the link of Irrespective to (Jones and Keatingor Germany could be seen as a way of dealing with regional separatism. 1995). such as Spain infederal states units high administrative the some instance, of autonomy For Yet, regionalization approach. bottom-up or atop-down either through area, an of autonomy administrative the is also a term 36 CEU eTD Collection 2002). way similar a whichinstates in nationcharacterized are by “nationess” 1999b, (Hettne Hettne 2005, and Söderbaum“regionness” 2000,by constituted and characterized are regions Thus, region. a therefore and areas, economic, and political interactionin a given area, which would make this area distinguishable from other 17 2002). The top-down strategic is2002). Thetop-down called approach regionalism,bottom-up whilethe process 1995a,political and and Mansfield input(Hurrell Milner1997,Hettne Söderbaum 2000, intentionalnon- a in equally way, beobtained may integration regional time, through same At the 2003). Laursen complex interaction strategy integrationcan eventually that produce 1970,Mattli a givenarea within 1999, (Haas at society level hasdeveloped, beenoften apolitical perceivedEuropean Union regionalism as project and without the inwhich way the to due muchpartially and century a half than more For deliberate integration. regional this relation,could one look at dynamics the between cooperation regional at level and regionalism and regionalization could be also understood as opposing phenomena. To grasp phenomenon preferencefor strategy the From regionalism. widespread of viewpoint, of this alsorefer level could the to regionalism “regionness”,characterized by while a high of areas number of in the increase a worldwide may alsoexpress regionalization However, action). non-intentional or intentional through (either “regionness” of increase is an there within that an area thefact expresses while regionalization inagiven area, “regionness” Accordingly, is increase 2004). regional level a strategy to regionalism the(Fawcett at of activity concentration necessarily deliberate) not (and as anongoing and regionalization action, state-led usually and conscious as regionalism between differentiates increasingly scholarship academic relation, frame this better to order In regionalization. of manifestation a is phenomenon global a as initiatives regional of spread the while regionalism, of manifestation is a initiatives intergovernmental regional of creation the Similarly, separatismisproduced. in the manner which regional to while refers regionalization regionalism, of instance isan separatism regional example, For achieved. is regionalism The term of “regionness” was coined and popularized by Björn Hettne to refer to a degree ofsocial, adegree to refer to Hettne by Björn popularized and coined was of “regionness” term The 37 17 CEU eTD Collection actors. that are based onthe premise that regionalism is desirable, while policy refers only to the strategies of state that of policy.to this In section, preferable is strategy ofstrategy term the is employed separatism, to referto forany regional deliberatedemands actions express of that elites state or non-state political the as actors such state actors, while remaining mainly a state-led action. If one extends this conceptualization to non-state actors, 18 a be may integration bottom-up as regionalization instance, For other. each of independent than usual. However, regionalism and regionalization can be also conceptualized ishigher interaction which numberwithin inareas of the an increase areaorto in agiven interaction of an increase to namely of regionalization, phenomenon the mayleadto strategy ideology, regionalism is both a project and a strategy (Fawcett 2004). isa projectideology,(Fawcett both regionalism andastrategy As 1999a, Acharya 2002,Kim is2004). (Hettne aphenomenon rather regionalization while ideology, an and a phenomenon simultaneously be can regionalism short, In integration known as regionalization (Hurrell 335). 1995a, (i.e. through regionalism)butalso particularly and ofbottom–up process the through action deliberate necessarily emergethrough not a particular does community” belonging to “sharedof perception sense of inthe awareness At sametime, regional the aspirations.” put it, regionalism isbecause are such factors presentin all forms of In regionalism. sense,this as Kim (2004, 40) a “normative concept islimited its usefulness However, (ibid.). processes in involved regional actors of options referring to sharedmay be helpful in emphasizing identity normativerole the of factors in and shaping the values, norms, identityformalized intergovernmental regional 2004, 433).This (Fawcettorganisations distinction and of asthecreation such tothe “harder”approaches identity” asopposed awareness or regional sense of a “promoting at actions aiming deliberate those to refers it context, this In strategy. political as regionalism of realm the within differentiating for also employed As if convoluted werethings enough, not softregionalismhowever, is, aterm hasbeen that Hveem 1999,Kim 2004). is soft called regionalization or regionalism (Hurrell 1995a, 1995b,Payne and Gamble 1996, Fawcett (2004, 433) refers to regionalism as botha project and policy,which involves bothstate and non- 38 18 Regionalism as CEU eTD Collection Table 1.1Regionalismincontemporary scholarship may known regionalization. beas relation, sometimes conceptual a through not and preference linguistic a through just which, regionalism, of phenomenon isthe results two these of Either initiatives. regional of number inthe an increase to and transformed intoa strategy and if successful, leads to the creation of a new regional structure which, a project, is regionalism time, same the At integration. regional at aim not does distinct phenomenon from the effect of regionalism as strategy, especially if this strategy Preferential trade agreements Regional intergovernmental Administratively dividing a Cross-border cooperation Bottom-up increase of Top-down increase of Regional separatism Political integration REGIONALISM VARIANTS OF Soft integration cooperation autonomy autonomy territory Regional integration, (intergovernmental) Regional autonomy Regional separatist Regional Trade or economic or Trade regional cohesion regional Soft regionalism Regionalization subregionalism Paradiplomacy As instance or Trans-border regionalism, Subregional regionalism regionalism cooperation movement product 39 EQUIVALENT CONCEPTS EQUIVALENT (intergovernmental) regional integration regional separatism regional Trade or economic or Trade regional autonomy regional autonomy (Regionalization) Subregionalism, (trans-border) Regionalism, Regionalism, Regionalism, Regionalism, As project or Regionalism, regionalism regionalism cooperation ideology regional - Trans-border regionalism, Trans-border subregional cooperation, Regional integration, Regionalization, soft Regionalization, (intergovernmental) Trade or economic or Trade Regionalization, Regionalization, Regionalization Regionalization regionalization, subregionalism regionalization As process or phenomenon cooperation, Subregional regionalism regionalism regionalism regionalism regionalism CEU eTD Collection mainly on politicalfocus would andthese of regionalism for the resurgence of explanations set alternative factors theworld.throughout international political Third, within economy be alsoan wouldthere at playWar Cold the place after took that of transformation larger process of a aspart regionalism frame would which economy, at political domesticinternational (critical) the from come would level. international institution asa or product internationalof Finally, institutions. A second direction asan regionalism treat that thereinstitutionalism and by neo-functionalism influenced approaches would they identify four would institutional be directions First,there of research. beseveral the New Accordingly, 1999). andShaw Bøås, (Marchand, research directions several more distinct to according of regionalism meanings the by fog separating conceptual some of regionalist the them belongs to Marianne Marchand, Morten Bøås and Timothy Shaw, who chose to clear Oneof in respect. morethis developed are asthey notable, areparticularly attempts only two fewonly map sought to thefieldbeyond forsearch theusual aworking definition.far, So of atinputtingattempts is order some discover field.the whyit This is to that surprising With such a richness meanings frequently of overlapping, would one ahigh number expect meaningful communication within one field of across regional disciplines.or research frequently employed. Thissituation creates notonly confusion butalso helpshardly compete for a significantly lower number of unique terms, with phenomena regionalism regional various being the mostunderstanding of ways different twenty-six these However, multiplication raises the number of versions torefer toregional phenomena to twenty-six. phenomenon. This ideology,or OR asprocess or ORasproject product, or instance as EITHER canbe conceptualized variants nine these all regionalism”, “soft exception of regionalism couldidentified be the beyond different disciplinary With connections. the major of understanding ways nine different Onecannotice that concepts. these of intricacies thelinguistic andshows previousTable 1.1on thesediscussions the page summarizes 40 CEU eTD Collection when it comes to regionalism. Furthermore, none of them is much interested in regionalism interested much is them of none Furthermore, regionalism. to comes it when more significant are actions state-driven that heal., concedes et likeMarchand However, levelsimplicitly totwo –the Hurrell society states. and the 1995b) refers contrast, (1995a, In of) states. between relations isnature ultimately the (transforming about all regionalism multilevel/multidimensional approach NRA/T wouldof beinterested more into that issue but the suggest that Bøås,andShaw(1999) place. Marchand, takes interaction which regional to compare. At the sameare difficult thetwo although cooperation, intergovernmental regional to similar of research time, both these mapping asacategory are treated identity and awareness instance, regional For ofregionalism. types efforts tend to disregard case of Hurrell mix(1995a, 1995b),the is between rather dimensionsthe of analysis and the the levels Thisin In its visible shortcomingmost Marchand, Shaw Bøås,and the effects. (1999). is on nature of regionalism with the on thosestudies that overlapping the mix attemptthey is that taxonomies at these explaining both with problem main The the resurgence of regionalism or 1995b). contribute to the creationmay increase with regional an of together awareness ledcooperation andpolitical economic of a region state- as well as integration, formal and informal inwhich as way the to refers it as a regionalism unit of the internationalcohesion. The last category wouldsystem be in fact a combination of the previous four(Hurrell types of regional and integration, regional (economic) state-promoted cooperation, interstate regional 1995a, identity, and awareness regional integration), informal or regionalism (soft regionalization are there view, his In with. deal would five regionalism of variety acertain problem of type the on directionshemore as focuses complex, yet classification, a similar proposes Andrew Hurrell borders. national transcends often that phenomenon multidimensional and multilevel a as and Regionalism regionalism Approach/Theory in whichtreats aglobal (NRA/T), perspective of regionalism studies or variants of regionalism. These are 41 CEU eTD Collection Most notably, it makes arbitrary definition including international any regionalism, of implications. several has phenomena regional of space the in establishing shortcoming The 1995b) succeed in bringing together and consistently all group forms of current regionalism. maya criterion Marchand,Bøås,andexplainShaw (1999)norHurrell whyneither (1995a, disciplinarylegacies, background, focus, preferences theincomplete and formulation of such own Beyond authors’ the neglected. or in maybeforgotten categories which some process criterion for defining processofgrouping the species,the categories an remains arbitrary such isdefinedidentified. thecommoncriterion features can be a At same without the time, after Only framework. conceptual same the under phenomena political regional of instances each between of relation the to similar remains theseregionalism soft and cooperation intergovernmental phenomena betweenregional relation the comparable, make them to a criterion of existence the without and kangaroos, However, policy or research context. ameaningin Each hasbeengranted a particular comparable. hardly are despiteexample, for regionalism, soft and cooperation intergovernmental the contemporary criterion,a unifying of non-equivalent phenomena regional things. the Withoutand meandifferent this may shown, as already efforts viz. regionalism.However, subject, one indeed to to bringresearch described and byMarchand, and Bøås, Shaw(1999) Hurrell relate (1995a, 1995b) of all varieties All is. analysis of subject the exactly what first identifying without directions research different together fieldmay be that they factbring the of regionalism conceptual A possible reasonresearched. for identifying thethe commonalities and the differences of all the versions of regionalism currently shortcomingsboth these cross-disciplinary overviews. For these reasons, they are less useful for by neglected completely are separatism oflevel orregional regional at of autonomy increase these attemptswithin the borders of the state. In fact,more separatist phenomena of regionalism such as the at the simplification of the 42 CEU eTD Collection international interaction (Kissinger 1994). At the same time, the resulting balance of balance of same power Atthe resulting time, the 1994). interaction (Kissinger international each other. was of mainInMarbeauto counterbalance 2001).Theregional these arrangements purpose this way, blocks thefavoured development small Waltersseveral (Vellas 1952, of regional 1948, states tried domesticscenes on the of League,aswellcertain political framework configurations the to gain moreLeague security of Nations.and created newly of the task the exclusively been have should and stability peace international economic However, of question the War. First World Initially, followed the that peacesettlements unsatisfactory advantages the deceiving increasing and military political instability,which by was partially generated inthe results the to wereareaction arrangements intergovernmental These 2003,3-4). 3, Söderbaum of the 2001a, and Öjendal (Schulz, Söderbaum, Europe agreements within alliances economic and negotiations military regional the creation several of in with initiatives the 1930s, emerged The first held within international order. on thought and ininternational relations action of traditions from certain the Contemporary appear suddenly regionalism in not did historical vacuum,butor a developed 1.2 The evolution of international regionalism in world politics of this chapter, I show that the first solution is not satisfactory. then derive the concept of regionalism and that of international regionalism. In the remaining and region, namely element, common only the from starting regionalism of field conceptual re-create the isto the The secondsolution on topic. debates andacademic empirical research regionalism. on research other any ignoring regionalism, international of concept the generated that In this way,to this problem.First, one can try to identify the common features of the political phenomenaone couldmeaningful investigation of regionalchoose phenomena across disciplines. There are two solutions or regionalism,re-create which is the focus of this dissertation.a definition At the same time, it hardly allows basedfor a on existing 43 CEU eTD Collection justifying a doctrine, while rival. In this dissertation, however, predictions, it is no surprise that distorted) interpretationof the tradition and the fact that the Cold Warevents confirmed muchof its [and] historical processes asthey actually place”take (Morgenthau 1960,4). this Givenis highly positive actually (yet it as nature human with concern “theoretical or as 14) 1939, (Carr consequences” and causes their of analysis [and] offacts “acceptance as supporters by its presented often was doctrine the Theory, Relations 20 the in Yet, tradition. respective the to regalism sovereign states and not to aninterpretation of world politics as close as possible to reality. Forthis reason, Contrary widespreadto a reading of the terminology,“real” referred initially to theregalian rights of the 20 active generation of debates onworld peace (Boutros-Ghali 1949, Mangone 1954). onworld politics. In international politics, this liberal perspective was rather new wasand supported by very a states to become more required trustfulhave withwould each goal other andThis renounce security. to exclusivelyan collective of self-centred, means the protectionist through notably most view peace, world ensure to 19 actions and ideas (Nye 1971, Fawcett 2004, 2005).like samethe AtFawcett forerunners, time, actions andideas(Nye1971, their times’ those of review post-hoc a from rather visible is it and leadership political the among minimal was such awareness historical context, particular in that However, European. be exclusively not might interaction international that fact the of awareness incipient environment. self-help anarchic, hostile, allegedly an in survival national seek continuously would they interaction and in international would bethekey this states actors According tradition, to forcenturies. international politics had dominated that tradition regalist followed the success ofliberal in international thinking relations. theincreasing despite previous had decades, from during the acted states different way the The strategies of regional cooperation developed may as negative. regional qualify cooperation during the Interwar period were not purpose of its enhancing of common the thisdevelopment members.much reason, Interwar For highly in abundant protectionist provisions, none of initiativesthese was with created the while Moreover, countries. participantthe protect economically or militarily defend need to sucharrangementsWhiting were theof was that logicthe uponwhich built 1956).Inshort, minimizedhavemilitaryshould further possibility (Haas1953,Haasand of the conflicts This traditionof self-help and prominence of national interest has beenmost frequently labelled as In the first part of the 20th century, most notably after the First World War, there had been several attempts rather than rather regalist 20 Realism What differentiated the new alliances from their predecessors was an standpoint. realism is employed exclusively for referring to academic scholarship more inclined towards inclined more scholarship academic to referring for exclusively employed is might have beena more appropriate term fordescribing political actionbelonging realism regalism became more frequently employed and betterknown than its linguistic th century, withthe development of the discipline of International isused to referto the political manifestations of this particular 44 19 In fact, in many respects, they closely realism . CEU eTD Collection mid-40s continued to be strongly related to League,the partially theseon grounds (Schiavone 2001, 6). included in the art. 23 of the Covenant of the League21 of Nations (Rittberger and Zangl 2006, 5-6) and until the Hettne, 2005). To a certainHettne, 2005).To this wasaresultof extent, dominating still the Eurocentric Only WorldWar1995, the Second after (Yalem1962,Fawcett regionalismtruly developed policy 1995, 2004,2005). (Fawcett foreign to benefitsinapproach see of a regional and regional tothink the inclined terms possibility andlimits international of establishing an political leadersgovernment, werelittle the with concerned times. More those of leadership political for the very appealing European integration but, despite some notable proposals and projects, regionalism was not did have that collaboration form vocation not the federal took auniversal schemes of of regional The rareplans of 2004, 1995, 2005). beintended(Fawcett universal to fact cooperation. international of promotion the for bodies international specialized of creation the favoured influence of the provisions partially underthe werecreated arrangements These Societies. Red Cross League of of the as such the projects universal Covenant promoted actors international new these of Most projects. of the League of Nations. ininternational become involved had society civil transnational active an increasingly Particularly inart.century Europe, 19th and particularly same the mid since Atthe time, scene. international 23 andgroups interest civil private had society becomeactivists morevisibleonthe Unlike in inclined however,existed. previous cooperation, the More regionally centuries, in and exclusivelyEurope from a European viewpoint. continuedbehave to if mattered inas everything that international place politics mostly took Marbeau 2001). Regions continued tobe equivalentto world leaders, whileleaders world butmuchalso indebted toawidespread Eurocentric view politics (Mangoneworld of 1954, Interwarthe regional initiatives have seem Europe, largely limited notonly to remained to The International Labour Organization (ILO), for instance, was a direct consequence of the provisions of the consequence direct a was instance, for (ILO), Organization Labour International The 21 However, these newly created arrangements, while regional in scope, were in were inscope, while regional arrangements, thesenewly created However, 45 CEU eTD Collection this explanatorythis model its and alternatives, see Ghica (2007). regional blocks that reproduced were systems theproblems andconfrontation subordinate The arena. of the dominant international system. entire Forthe more details namely on USconfronted, the USSRand the which in This was a unity of the so-called dominant system. Inthat historical context, the dominant systemwas the one 22 for allies and the higher the chances to gain some advantage in the race. demonstrations of power, the bigger the regional initiative, the more cost-effective the search international were actions in most which context suchmeans.Ina served well arrangements of developmentcertain block. regional by or Supporting the creation co-opted opponentthe were before these governments in other findmain actors allies each of two the that required confrontation the logic of the same time, the At countries. with other cooperate to needed neutral tomaintainbutwanted inautonomy a higherdegreeof foreign strategies policy their the Warsaw Pact. In this environment, theblock had blocktheNATO,instance, Communistthe created while terms, Western the for small states that could not or did not Insecurity institutions. severalregional want them generated of Each formed. blocks ideological to be Two started. for allies fierce competition a and confrontational increasingly became relations international world, the throughout spread logic bipolar the As Union. Soviet the and of America theUnited States racebetween ideological of the result also the was initiatives large for preference the were.Partially, havepolitics in international to asay its chances higher was, the regional the agreement bigger the perspective, this From regional problems. primarily an answer wereconsidered regional arrangements War, World to Second decades after the two in thefirst the international instability and less an effort to deal with specific smaller scale the agenda and issues of the international system. international the issues of and agenda scale the smaller a at reproduced initiatives regional Therefore, participants. for all the global were necessarily international relations ideathat onthe based still were period, in theInterwar like vocation, tradition international of Regionalpolitics. whilelongeragreements, no universal by In the the 1950s In 1960s,and type this was of thinking bestencompassed the concept in of subordinate system. 46 22 For this reason, especially this reason, For CEU eTD Collection spent on were justifying why efforts some developing countries did research of the not belong to much Secondthe World 1970s the in especially instance, For outliers. ofthe existence the explaining on time long a for focused have scientists social reality, of the representation of type of this appropriateness 23 non-aligned countries were predominantly under-developed. predominantly were countries non-aligned Western Block. The includedCommunist also Block mostlywhile developing states, the World and the Third World,three respectively.groups resultingtime. The that at advanced economically most were the that countries those of trajectory The fromfirst this group development the on held state each classification that position the coincided than more nothing expressed distinction more the sense, were this In orindicators. less economic known certain on highest scored that with countries asthe to relative thethe First World, the Seconddeveloped. The benchmarkand developed,under- Countriesconsidered weredeveloping divisions. or political on which states were placed fashionable remained entireWarfurtherthe throughout reinforced Cold ideological these under one and 1950s in the of emerged had the that arena international three the of representation A simplified labels was foreign policy foreign policy strategies lesslikelyitswere and directly influence chancesthe to world In short, the smaller the state was in terms of power, the more limited to the regional level its thosetimessignificantly 1969). 1958,Brecher (Binder bipolarthe seem of tensions to reflect not did and area the of legacies historical the by primarily motivated was states East Middle the of interaction War, the decades Cold the two of first instance,the during For bipolarity. Moreover, for these states not all of these possibilities could havebeen expressed in terms of and total, smaller the had states limited more foreign policy and bargainingpossibilities. global wasnecessarily blocks of international politics two leaders whilethe the for However, to focus onlarge regional arrangements. isit political environment, for nosurprise along that, havecontinued time, decision-makers deal way to with anincreasingly complex social Withinmental andframework this reality. purposes dividingintosuch the world was a regions practical ideologicallyand convenient Thisoverlapping was imperfect many and cases didnotfit the model.However, instead of questioning the 47 23 Particularly for political Particularly CEU eTD Collection conceptual infield.conceptual For purpose, investigate andthis part of following the chapter, I lastthis contributeregionalism, they do not significantly toclarifying and mappingrigorously its international of development historical the describe help elements these although However, contexts. political particular and overall both on depends interaction international which fulfils various foreign functions impactand policy on dynamics whose the of level, governmental at asaform of cooperation be understood can regionalism international period, irrespective historical the of that, also suggests It political phenomenon. is arecent literatureTo sum up, on evolutionthe international ideaof the supports regionalism thatthis internationalwave 2005). andCostea of (Langenhove regionalism itcooperation and seems have to announcing for high potential development, perhapsathird inter-regional called been has phenomenon This Asia. East in South ASEAN and of states that already developed stronger trade links, such as the Mercosur in Latin American butalsogroups with states with separate only not arrangements of series trade a concluded has instance,Union European the For grounds. on trade particularly organisations, 2003). At the2005, 1995, 2004, Hettne levelprevious both attheoretical and policy period (Fawcett same time,much higher, whichfrequently made unsuitable distinctions the the throughout operated one can observe also was Their complexity greater. increasingly hasbecome arrangements of variety regional an increaselocal, War, initiatives small formed bemore could and middle-range thus easily and the of Cold of interaction the constraints ideological from the Freed world. overthe emergedall arrangements regional of wave a second 1990s, the in when, significantly changed situation The between regionalneighbourhood area favoured a smaller scale approach to regionalism. international horizonpolitics most is governments of largely confined totheir the fact that of the aswell as of constraints, these awareness increasing The politics. 48 CEU eTD Collection embeddedfederalist in thinking evenin advancedmore refinements such as Etzioni (2001). 25 dating back as far as fourteenththe century, see Heater(1992). upona federal constitution (Codehove-Kalergi 1988). For an interesting overviewsof previous suchprojects Kalergi’s much visibility. This happened particularly publicationthe after in early 1920s of Richard Coudenhove- 24 His of Mitrany. work David the especially due to WorldWar, aftermath of the Second the in mostly developed a research direction is functionalism, approach universalistic similarly federalist logic, could be most ideally achieved through a federation of world of states. a federation all ideallymostbe achievedthrough logic, could federalist temporal. At incidental is, of thisand however, typegoal character of cooperation peace. Theregional of the end of thehigher achieve the asto aswell problems, political solveis it particular to a means sense, day, federalism intergovernmental terms, is politicalcooperation thefirst step towards Inthis unification. aims federations thecreation of through of within Europe states. enduring conflicts at universalinternational regionalismpeace, emerged mostly as a political projectof strand that a as proposed Federalism to solve the which, transactionalism. and functionalism federalism, are These within research directions. different among three the distinguish may one further context, particular Within this (Rosamond 2000,20-49). states European (Western) the relations among international of dynamics the to specific circumstances bypolitical generated debate, mostly aEuropean this was present, weresometimes elsewhere developed and practices aftermath the influences from War. SecondWorldThough the occasional political of theory in andperiod interwar of the in thecontext ended conflict human be and peace could reached A first bulk of international1.3 International regionalism as academic inquiry regionalism scholarship attempted to address the issue relations. andinternational science political of how of field the within area research theoretical specific as regionalism international of issue the This was particularly the perspective of early federalists but the vision of a universal federation remains federation of auniversal vision the but federalists ofearly perspective the particularly was This The idea was not new but inthe political and intellectual climate of the early twentiethcentury, itgained Pan-Europa , a booklet that put forward an articulated and provocative vision of a united Europe built Europe united of a vision provocative and articulated an forward put that booklet a , 49 24 In federalist In 25 A CEU eTD Collection 26 spatial 1969,4-11).continuity (Deutsch is a certain there when easier much form can they communities, human like because, level Securityframework. communities in theinternational sphere may develop easily at regional transanctionalist the within isrelevant cooperation intergovernmental regional international (Deutsch et al. 1957,5).Furthermore, alsounlike for federalism functionalism,and way” other in some disputes their settle will but physically, other each fight not will community membersthe that of is that realassurance in “there which of groups countries namely mightcommunities, security build states that suggested transactionalist project the Instead, itdeny roledid nation-state. the not traditional of approaches, the this perspective wasalso strategiesproposing supranational unlike two but, theother byKarl forward Deutsch, most notably could bereduced.Put conflictviolent among states federalism andfunctionalism,a vision about the way proposed in of whichthelikelihood The third1994). transactionalism, direction, solution a worldfunctional apolitical to andrather of complex interdependence (Taylor P. Evenin(Mitrany 1948). 1937, isthis case, international regionalism perceivedasatemporal approach functionalist mayof a asresult emerge schemes regional cooperation environment, functionalist ideal in an that, possibility the reject not do functionalists However, state faults. Therefore, it commonly opposes regional intergovernmental cooperation. atabiggerthe scale reproduce away as to regionalism international portrays functionalism format, its classic In institutions. supranational functional bewith replaced to needs fulfil certain fulfil format forlastingproposal theachievementof instead a looking was ideal that, for peace of the Transactionalism is sometimes knownalso as the communications approach (Haas 1970). in which international relations should take place, governments cooperate in order to inorder cooperate governments place, take should relations international inwhich functions (Mitrany 1933, 1943). For this purpose, the traditional state system Forthis traditionalthe (Mitranystate 1933,1943). purpose, 26 50 emerged at around thesamelike at and, emerged period CEU eTD Collection category of scholarship emerged after the Cold War, mostly from a (neo)Marxian tradition of Asecondfrequently aremore 1997). andMilner atplay factors domestic (Mansfield increasingly (Keohane whether transnational andNye1971,1977)or andactors relations dividedinstitutions onwhether these arethe result interdependence of complex and international isregionalism aproduct ofinternational institutions. This camp isfurther which developed partly under the influence neo-functionalism of and institutionalism, main Very couldintoWithin approaches. bedivided roughly, two firstone, these camps. the of variety by characterized a large oneisalso this above, briefly presented directions arrangements and regional (economic) flows of exchanges. Like the rest of the research trade around regionalism, particularly international cases of other around developed has significantly field, theorizing scholarshipAlthough dominates the recent EU-centred this results. possible the of one is this intergovernmentalism liberal for Instead, processes. cooperative From a neo-functionalism viewpoint, this is a certainty when integration. functionalregional to logic lead may is level appliedregional in at cooperation intergovernmental that assume camps both these such Despite divergences, 1998). (Moravcsik circumstances historical institutional and under political certain economic, leaders took thatnational rational choices of series a of result the rather is integration European that is argument intergovernmental Theliberal 2004,49-52). incremental which hasbeenand(Schmitter agradual process functional through among has European beencreated the interdependence cooperation, states regional isthat neo-functionalism of tenet main The intergovernmentalism. liberal and refinements, and versions many its with neo-functionalism, are These identified. be can camps main two scholarship, regionalism international of generation this Within project. Community andevolution European the of thenature emergedfrom debatesaround the by asecondwave influencedLargely threepreviousthinking traditions, regionalist of these 51 CEU eTD Collection Deutsch’s terminology, a “security community,” it generates integration. This integration integration.it This generates community,” a “security Deutsch’s terminology, buildingorin iswith When purpose of suchinteraction created the project, acommon least interaction produces interdependence. aminimal at international behaviour therefore previous by constrained is interaction international standpoint, intergovernmentalism evenfrom a liberal Yet, interdependence. from of concept this the position explicitly derives which inspiration, neo-functionalist and functionalist of literature in the held is belief this visibly, Most legacies. intellectual particular the of irrespective scholarship, regionalism international most of throughout permeates anideathat integration, leadsto cooperation ultimately, vision that, to the relates A problem second international regionalism. of species the andthen regionalism space of define the to acriterion needs still one Therefore, impossible. theoretically regionalism of form other any from distinct phenomenon unique asa regionalism international of thetreatment makes This regionalism. international than explanatorydeveloping in advance they more modelsthe phenomena, political regional other the all theignore more they need to addressalso at all other levels of political interaction.the In other words, evenissue if these traditions would of regional valid is interaction necessarily meansin international of logicThis matters expressed the that phenomenain nature. universalistic are them all of First, problems. intrinsic other two have traditions these all among well-establishedaccording developed and traditions, totheirHowever, preferences. chose could field researchers in which is an academic regionalism international In short, 2003). (Hettne borders national the transcends often that phenomenon multidimensional and multilevel withcope local 1999b,particular issues 2005). In (Hettne this sense, regionalism is a and regional betweentendencies, inextricablean global interdependence and the need to global between tension the of a product is regionalism international perspective, its From IR scholarship. This is usually known as the New Regional Approach/Theory (NRA/T). 52 CEU eTD Collection Cooperative Initiative (SECI) should not exist. Furthermore, unlike in the case of in unlikethe caseof the exist. Furthermore, not should (SECI) Initiative Cooperative between the South East European Cooperation Process (SEECP) and the Southeast European inin membership and both goals overlap perfect almost caseof the Particularly present. interdependence in andintegration realworld the be of then politics not overlapping should inoverlapping, both of terms andingoals ofmembership. terms If weresuchthingasthere isin there frequent case in mentioned specific this As introduction, the interaction. already play would integration in aresult either at asapolitical of this case motivation or political European,suggestis interdependencethat namely noempirical to evidence there or in Cold international foris WarCentral post researching regionalism and suitable East traditions existent none of the for which reason is another problems, there two these Except isintegration nottruly falsifiable (Haas 1970, 628). Inthis as early demonstrated. sense,out 1970,the notion asErnstof Haaspointed as putinterdependencenot but is itTo andintegration only differently,postulated none of these provides integrationconvincing evidence interdependence that and really exist. they explain theand emergence regional integration pervasiveness of andinterdependence, relations of power in a web of global interdependence. Nevertheless, irrespective of various of the isaconsequence interdependence view the regional that supports commonly way critical camp the Instead, regional integration. leadto choices strategic which particular to it comes when diverge They strategy. political of a conscious is aconsequence integration regional that idea the forward put (neo)realism and version) intergovernamentalist liberal the specifically, (neo)functionalism, as well as some of the variants of (neo)liberalism (including More theory. inIR approaches critical (Marxian) and rationalist the to correspond mayviews be distinguished within literature the touchesthat this topic. They roughly challengeimportant is identifyto regional integration and interdependence. Twodifferent most The problematic. arerather interdependence of concept paradigm embedded and the 53 CEU eTD Collection regionalism, which I further developin chapter 3. international conceptof the deriving then and field of regionalism conceptual the recreating phenomena. To address highly avoid andultimatelyprescriptive regional cannot toother referring political these issues, in istheliterature this tradition, the of irrespective that, being fact the important most the reasons, next chapter I propose sections this showed lastis highly in two this several of solution the chapter, for problematic an alternative I As topic. the on debates academic and research empirical in existing viewfeatures its identify to by and phenomena regional other to unrelated phenomenon unique a regionalism international consider to been have might A solution regionalism. of species asa regionalism international political which makesphenomena, impossible it to define non-arbitrarily fieldthe of shortcomings. Most importantly, epistemological serious has literature on regionalism a numberof sum To up, current it lacks consistent itsof members.integration criteria to define frameworksEuropean of intergovernmental aims achieveregional cooperation the to the space of regionaldraws and as I international scholarship European most of which classic the on Union regionalist project show in more detail in chapters 7 and 8, none of the Central and East 54 CEU eTD Collection and East European regional intergovernmental cooperation. intergovernmental regional European East and more restof the using detail dissertation the throughout War Cold thecaseof post Central regional cohesiveness of concept Icoined the this purpose, For may time. over occur that changes the about have and regional products that stability of degree the on narratives generate to alternative an necessitates integration of concept the to renouncing However, separatism. regional and regionalism, autonomy regionalism, trans-border regionalism, international phenomena: integration. major Thisallows four amongdistinguishing only political of types regional regional of notion the way any in using without vocabulary its developing and space of regionalism. Then, in the second section, I build a theory of regionalism, defining its reconstruction for the I use that social constructivism of elements the Ipresent section first the in direction, research diverse increasingly an and arecent both is constructivism social Since weight. normative-representational has ahigh of region concept because the mostly a social-constructivist perspective Iadopt attempt, this in In have common. phenomena concept from the fieldstarting andrelated its conceptof regionalism the Ireconstruct chapter, of region,in this this problem, Asto toregionalism. asolution related research directions of different which among communication as well as little misunderstandings, and much overlapping generates seems factthat a its field, and define regionalism tocriteria to consistent no are there because mostly be the difficult as task ismuchthere onlyconfusion scholarship within on topic.the Thishappens thingbe a However,this to proved framework. conceptual in acoherent regionalism international that place to literature onregionalism aiming I reviewedvarious academic the chapter, In theprevious regional politicalA C CONSTRUCTIVISTRECONSTRUCTION OF REGIONALISM HAPTER 2 , which I develop in the last section of the chapter and then explore in 55 CEU eTD Collection (2000) and Zehfuss (2002). Krasnerand (1998). For comprehensive overviewsof the approach, see forinstance Hopf (1998), Guzzini years afterthe establishment of thejournal, and from those contributions most notably Katzenstein, Keohane, 1998). See also special issue the of constructivism asone of three maindirections of IR thinking, alongside (neo)realism and (neo)liberalism (Walt 28 Wæverand (1997). constructivism,see forinstance Price and Reus-Smit (1998), as wellas thecontributions included Neumannin 27 research directions, the issue of change is particularly significant to distance itself from distance from to itself the significant ofchangeisparticularly issue the research directions, formation interest andthinking, anarchy, such From as (Hopf traditional power 1998). these relations international of themes classic of the most addresses constructivism theory, relations. international on to it,most of the recent surveys the of discipline also donot fail treatto this new perspective critical if in Even sometimes or IR textbooks. Relations, inInternational Studies Cambridge Relations Journal ofInternational on the relations between power and knowledge and that of Jacques Derrida on text. on Derrida of Jacques that and andknowledge power between relations the on postmodernistthinking, among which frequent references work aretothe of Michel Foucault lineage, muchof isheavily constructivistthe influencedby modernist research and critical thinking.Although thereisnowidely sharedcanon its intellectual with to respect of influence the under disciplines, from other and topics debates various fieldwith research emerged inthe discipline in late1980smostly the hybridizationthrough the of IR the It theory. relations ininternational paradigm recent isarelatively Social constructivism 2.1 Socialconstructivist premises IR journals, such inmainstream emergence its since hasbeen granted research thatconstructivist importance as sphere of international relations. This is easily visible if one evaluates the editorial space and place thestudy for of one majorthe phenomena take of that approaches within political the has become last decade,constructivism in the especially However, theoretical perspective. new this ignores largely still spectrum science political the of rest the theory, IR of field the In a state-of-the-art article that is often referred to in the discipline, Stephen Walt even portrays even Walt Stephen discipline, the in to referred often is that article state-of-the-art a In Forinteresting analyses of the influences of critical theory postmodernismand thinking insocial International Organization 28 Despite heavy influences and borrowings from from social andborrowings critical heavy Despite influences International OrganizationInternational , in collections prestigious IR of publications, such as the 56 , International Security dedicated to the survey of IR thinking fifty thinking IR of survey the to dedicated and the and European 27 Unlike CEU eTD Collection as symbolic interactionism (Wendt 1999, 170-1). 31 be considered foundingthe manifesto of constructivismsocial in discipline the (Smith 1997). his Worldin of ourmaking (Wendt Zehfuss 1999, 1n, 2002, 10).First published1989, in thisbookwould later theory, itseems that Nicholas Onuf employed the term and the vision of social constructivism for first the time outside IR, philosopherJohn Searle recently revived thedebate (Smith 2001, 39). In international relations Thomas Luckman and AlfredBerger, Schutz used Peter extensively sociologists 1960s, the notion mid as of early as the social constructioninstance, For of framework. this reality, within while, exclusively develop approach, the notionof social constructivism was neither the invention of international relations theory nor it 30 (neo)liberalism, see particularly Hopf (1998). constructivism (Guilhotof 2005, 170-4).forerunner a as Onthe points regarded beon which may constructivism Nye 1971), and agreeKeohane with(neo)realism (i.e. relations and transnational on Keohane Robert Nye and of Joseph work the as such research, (neo)liberal sense, In this points. onseveral agree they as 29 of the other topics on the IRagenda as well (Zehfuss 2000, 3-5). mainstream inperspectives it the discipline, though provides alternative formany accounts interaction and may be different for different observers. different for different be may and interaction world it exists, has ameaning. Thismeaning is socially developsconstructed, through social and they how each For constructivists, material construct (Hopf 1998, 192). other” although whatnormswhich “identitiesareconstructed, andpracticesaccompany their reproduction, label. the hence world, constructed socially a in develop humans, like actors, international isthat constructivism social of tenet main The regionalism. of vocabulary the reconstruct further I which on premises the present butto of constructivism foundations discuss theseepistemological isnot to dissertation the identity formation. andinterest identity exist with normative-representationalthe field continuousthe through meaning,processes of page is avisual mechanism,of representation showingthis waymaterial the canco- world basisthe formation, for interest its whichin is basis turn for the Figure action. 2 onthe next of structures acquiresuch actors collectiveidentity, meaning. Through structures, whichis As some constructivists acknowledged, this visionis heavily influenced by the sociological approachknown As Steve Smith shows in an overview of the way in which the idea of social construction emerged evident so not are astheories mainstream an more the IRand constructivism between differences the issues, some On 30 57 Its specific puzzle is to uncover the way in 31 Social interaction generates interaction Social 29 My purpose in of My purpose part this CEU eTD Collection 32 interests, is a power process that takes place both at material and discursive level.and identities of consequently and meanings, collective of transformation the differently, put it To change. the allows group that within power of structure the Rather necessary. differencethat ofmeaning is across possible makes social the change group butnot possible thepowernecessaryproducemeaningover into (Hopf social 180). Thefact a 1998, group” differentcategory 305-6). The (ibid., politicsidentity is “aof for continual control contest a but assume, usually would neoliberals and neorealists as self-interests, of similarity a mere not is interest collective sense, this In identity. acollective of formation the to due iscollective possible interest Therefore, 318-43). (Wendt 1999, collectiveidentity generates of This process “other.” include the to beextended may “self” the of images the neoliberalism, and neorealism as such approaches, self and Wendt, and (Jepperson, other” UnlikeKatzenstein mainstream in1997, 59). other In logic, constructivistthe identity to“mutuallyrefers and constructed evolvingimages of Fig. 2. The constructivist perspective on political/social realityFig. 2.Theconstructivist perspective onpolitical/social In this sense, constructivism incorporates the Foucauldian power/knowledge (Foucaultnexus 1980). identification 58 occurs through cooperation and occurs through 32 CEU eTD Collection theory is strategically used forgaining legitimacy within the discipline, see Pesram (1999). 33 constructivism maybe regardedratheras ina continuum questioning which of the the toquestion its attempts model boundariesthe of explanatory 1999). Thatis why (Wendt constructivism, goesbeyond the methodology,positivist especially in when last its it part, Social theory ofinternational politics Wendt’s Alexander instance, For author. one of work the within even maintain, to difficult tradition internationalof thinking. relations mayberegardedas constructivism socialconstructivism,whilea separate “proper” critical (Adler 1997,Checkel 1998). In this sense, conventional constructivism may be considered approaches critical/ reflectivist/ postmodern methodologies andinterpretativist/ positivist seize constructivism isperceivedas to between classicattempting a“middle-ground” thisreason,For conventional 184). 1998, (Hopf action” of causes identitiespossible as those treat to wish constructivists conventional whereas formation, identity with associated identity. As TedHopf nicely summarized it, “critical theory aims atexploding the myths theissueof inrelation with strands manifests two the between methodological difference than tointerpret Instead, critical has and ratherto amoreradical constructivism attempts attitude explain of science,modern may frequently it although many question of them 2000,1-23). (Zehfuss is whyitis usually amodernconsidered theoretical approach, which on relies principlesthe social principles of tracingsampling,and process theof methods This (Hoffman difference 1991). reality asthe such science, social mainstream of conventions epistemological the reject completely conventional version is closer tomainstream thinkingin theoretical sensethe itthat notdoes (PriceThe one. critical a and conventional a – tracks two into subdivided is commonly it However, and as self-labelled constructivist. is labelled or that scholarship largeamount increasingly Reus-Smit the within classify to difficult is often it and fluid very still is constructivism of field The 1998). Most strikingly, this For an interesting discussion of the way in which the notion of social constructivism as a middle ground , which is considered aclassicconventional of 33 59 However, the methodological distinction is CEU eTD Collection possibilities of science (Foucault 1971, 1976, 1980). 34 constructivism “is the viewthat “is the constructivism interaction. international) tosocial (and are exogenous evolve they in which framework conceptual the and interest their actors, international) (and human that belief widespread the challenges constructivism neoliberalism), and neorealism (i.e. IR in research mainstream with in opposition importantly, Most assumptions. common of a series on arguments their base constructivists lines, division these of Irrespective conflicts. international and tohuman related rights in matters especially much empirical research generates direction social constructivistmight viewpoint affect international law (Onuf second2001). This a from politics international of fundaments the rethinking way the about questions asks Onuf political interaction 1996, LapidandKratochwil (Kratochwil 1996). Similarly, Nicholas increasing but so far almost completely ignored role that cultural factors would have in giventhe normsrelations ininternational of for aradical reconsideration urges instance, for Kratochwil, Friedrich interaction. social in role their and behaviour human on influence the conventional within equally authors, are there Yet, advances. research meta-theoretical camp,constructivist most that are more a largeof Alexander is part Wendt’s (Wendt1999) andinterestedwork about 1992, 1994, on linethis in the – its formation,questionits possible categories and its inrole political decision-making. Thisis what of norms issues inidentity interested areusually constructivists Conventional research. of focus and major rules, their Another distinction increasingly in popular discipline accordingthe is one operated to the approach is. that critical/ reflectivist/ postmodern interpretativist/ more questioning is and themoreit from departs principlesthe methodology,of rationalist the issue. is a key concepts science normal of character “natural” From this perspective, constructivism is also a descendent of Michel Foucault’s work on discourse and the and on discourse work Foucault’s Michel of descendent a also is constructivism perspective, this From the manner in which world thematerial shapes andis 60 In Emanuel Adler’s words, 34 The more radical the CEU eTD Collection developed regions (i.e. areas distinguished from the rest of immutablebased spacefrom restof onan the the (i.e.areas distinguished developedregions reasoninvokedthe justify to In otherwords, differentiation.the “natural” organically or of irrespective level, atconceptual exist only that constructs arbitrary are all regions process, is space.Thisareaneighbouring called situated as are represented (1) in elementsthat of a group to thereference particularly but phenomenon a particulara political describe to “regionalism” of use the just not is in common have regionalism area; inwhatall As Ialready definitions out categories previouspointed the chapter, of and and (2) 2.2 Aconstructivistare vocabulary of regionalism represented as differentof the identity question. from thereconstruction of usingmostlyregionalism, conventional constructivism and its development rest of theitis not particularly easy. Inthe next section, Ishow how this framework can be applied to a and agency,it is the most important to social change. Yet, although social change is possible, interactionmeaningagency isboth toandis of structure onethatengine gives the the thus Since eachhuman other. constitute mutually fact,they In interaction. insocial matter actors and both structures in circumstances havedeveloped. Furthermore, and emerged they which particular the understanding without analysed meaningfully be not could phenomena political and social differently, it put To context. to sensitivity high a means this viewpoint, methodological a From it. with changes it but interaction international to exogenous not is interest reason, that For formation. interest of in process the more significant are latter the political/international) is actors influenced both by material and intersubjective but factors perspective has importantly,several consequences.Most behaviour humans of (and interpretations the materialof world shaped by human action andinteraction dependsondynamic normative and epistemic ” (Adler 1997, 322,emphasis” (Adler in original). This region 61 . Since the act of representation is amental theactof representation . Since CEU eTD Collection nothing more than rhetoric devicesremain political for purposes. borders” “natural and region” “natural while fictions, than more no are regions that accepted widely is can be convincingly criteria formulated (Granö such 1997, Deyonno 1997,Claval history) 1998). Currently, and irrespective geography of discipline, the (i.e. it research inclined empirically most of the viewpoint the from distinct from the restbe naturally of would the space, areas usuallysome that on historical, idea the political,expressing economic for used orsocial grounds.increasingly been However,have evenboundary” “natural related the and concept this Later, of France. map geologic the establish to time first the for attempted scholars 35 Although it is easier to perceive the material instances of normative- the of regionality, is instances it to perceive material the Although easier frameworks. into ideational particular are embedded systems value same time, these the benefits and the disadvantages they may bring atindividual and societalfor level. valued Atare the they viewpoint, a normative From dimensions. ideational and normative have elements material such However, space. neighbouring its of rest the from area an distinguish may that elements measurable materially are of criminality rate the and alphabetisation degreeof the investments, foreign of instance, amount the For nature. representational normative- and material of both are “regionality” of elements the thinking, constructivist with line In irrelevant. politically therefore and latent remains “regionality” elements, certain aware of politically Aslong becomes noone as concept. is apolitical “regionality” reasons, irrelevantis is and what betweenrelevant what distinction embedded polity.for the The relevance for the polityhave that elements those to only refers “regionality” research, of this context particular expresses inis of than neighbouring thatIcall areas an space attribute a certainfrequent more are some elements moment, a particular at and area inagiven that, The fact hierarchy as framework, andwell the as spatial dynamics thiswithin framework. relation time ina particular placed aspatial situation indicate they alsoof time because space but of power. of not only notions are regions In this sense, in less others. and places insome quantities For these in higher arepresent elements in certain atacertain time, point that, awareness increased the to related exclusively) not is (but be may differentiation of process the However, social exist, afactnot essence) could throughout science scholarship. widely accepted The notion of “natural region” appeared in the geographic literature after the French Revolution, when Revolution, French the after literature geographic the in appeared region” of “natural notion The 62 regionality . Within. the 35 CEU eTD Collection neighbouring space grants that area the characteristic of actual regionality from the from regionality actual of characteristic area the that grants space neighbouring (t a certain time A, at In situation squares. are of regionality elements possible only where the regionality. visual Figure presents of equivalent3 above a simplified inaworldregionizing area’s specific of that awareness increased of an maybethe consequence actual. This mental butalsoprocess apolitical Through act. “regionizing,”latentregionality becomes hierarchy, implicitlywhich conveysa Therefore, regionizingrelation of power. not only is a a normative of existence the expresses or creates this process others, than appropriate moment t call The act of representing an area as distinct from the rest of the world is a mental process that I Fig. 3.The construction ofaregion practices convey. these that representations institutional of products practices, religious aswell through valuesandideational the as affiliation areacould acertain material- inhabiting the of beassessedthrough people religious example, For visible. equally be sometimes may dimension representational 0 ), an observer considers some of the squares to be black and some white. The fact that, at that, fact white. The some beblackand squaresto the some of ), anobserverconsiders regionizing 0 , black squares are perceived as more frequent in in a certain area than asmore frequent areperceived , blackthe squares . Since the differentiation is based on certain criteria considered asmore iscertain considered based on criteria differentiation the . Since A 63 B CEU eTD Collection background of that “regionize.”background of those knowledge and values the about says it as regionality of elements areas’ those about notions of culture. In this sense, distinguishing areas from the rest of the space says as axiologicalmuch vacuums. Therefore, regions are not only notions of space and time but also existin and not epistemological regions do words, In other environments. representational normative- within certain generated is regionizing irrespective of situation, the framework should Therefore, be also presumed. existing normative-representational analready such project, of for theexistence isrequired relevance of political criterion B), latent regionality transformsinto actual regionality through a political projection. Since a In case(situation second in whichheacts. forthe the space relevant distinction the consider makesbackground that theobserver distinguish (1) betweenblack andwhiteand squares; (2) normative-representational basisof a certain actual the on into regionality is transformed regionality latent A), case (situation first In the observer. for the area becomes aregion that by Consequently, is politically observer. spacethe relevant this distinction considered and have been they allsimplification, (for representedsquares the between differentiate not does observer the A, situation as white) but he distinguishestransformation institutes a region. This case is illustrated in situation a B of Figure certain This 3. Unlike in warlord.” named the to “belonging element area regionality actual the into fromtransformed the rest of the is space characterises that someone” “able tobelong to element regionality latent he is able to see from the spot where he defeatedland the all histhat enemydecides belongsa warlord a combat, to him.after instance, In For this way, projections. the political of also Regionizingbemay not only product of increasedthe awareness but specific of regionality isaregionobserver. forthe area that relevant, considered is squares andwhite betweenblack squares distinction area.If the the regionality of awareof a particular becomes observer the sense, this In observer. of the viewpoint 64 CEU eTD Collection potential element of regionality furtherfor regionizing. be a may it appears, it once time, same the At regionality. actual of element isan identity regional of differentiation, of a process expression is the it identity. Since regional generates identity zero-moment collective representation, of process the Through less unchanged. borders of The this regionality. actual through regionexpressed identity) (zero-moment identity an are and borders its shifting with each new regionthe of are regionizing Thecharacteristics of regionizing. is process the through a region separated but its core remainsFigure 4 on the next more page shows or these relations. First, from the fieldregionality. of potential regionality inworld, which turn sharpens the senseregional identity of strengthensand aspecific of the from rest the difference of sense the may process enhance This repeated regionizing. identity regionality,generates thus andawareness through orpoliticalmore projections, Regional of regionality. element identity isanormative-representational regional Therefore, space. neighbouring from the it differentiates that an area of is acharacteristic identity limits circulate acquire of representations identity the delimitedafter by only their blackdots the regional and areas above, the as illustration use the same To a region. are as recognized is increasingly acceptedrepresentations develops. To put it differently,as an area acquires regional identity onlyrelevant when it identity by other is( identity acertain area conferred membersthat be, may they fluid however borderlines, of institution the of through space the of rest the the polity.from is delimited area Once an blackdots. markedwith be those could region of the limits Regionalthe example, previous the In areas. neighbouring the and region the between borderline amental institutes differentiation this of process, the character political the space. Beyond the of rest the from different as perceived is it region, a as framed mentally is area an When when such frame isincreasingly shared and apalimpsest of collective zero-moment identity 65 ). This identity becomes identity This ). regional CEU eTD Collection ideological regionalization as to may be referred which isphenomenon, alsoa asideology regionalism for preference regionalization is a phenomenon, while regionalism is not. Similarly, the spread or nothingmore than increased unintendedthe of consequence Consequently,regionalism. is regionalization while element, intentional an expresses always regionalism is that concepts to the spreadIn confusions, toavoid a product. order terminological the of regionalism as regionalism to refers meaning third the while a process, or project is a regionalism sense, second the In ideology. an be asmay regionalism that idea the product. expresses term the of meaning In thisfirst beliefs.The or actions of results such the political (3) or makesdistinctions; such that sense, from the world restof the the is any means a forachievingcertain purposes; (2) desirable action difference between the two In this context, Fig. 4.Regional identity formation regionalism is defined as (1) the belief that politically distinguishing a region todistinguish itfrom spreadof the as regionalism product. 66 regionalization should only refer CEU eTD Collection emerges, through the process of collective representation of the region. This collective This region. of the representation of collective process the through emerges, identity collective acertain product institutional this of creation the with sametime, the At created. was arrangement the which through process the as well as arrangement, security values creationachieved. Such the norms, andideasinformed projectthe of of a regional be can it how and represents security what to related ideas and values norms, certain For instance, a regional security arrangementis an institutional product. However, it conveys process product,regionalismproject, or or relies creates upon certain institutions.political As one. normative-representational a as well as dimension, institutional an has ideology) field of regionalism. within the therelationsconcepts between of a visual representation Figure 5aboveproposes Each of the four states of regionalism (i.e. project, process, product, Fig. 5.The field ofregionalism anew could talk about one of regionalism, nature the in significant ischanges by of accompanied Finally,when intensification regionalization the 67 wave ofregionalism . CEU eTD Collection be generated based on the view that certain autonomy is necessary at local level local for the level is necessary at certain autonomy basedon view that the be generated this political phenomenon is phenomenon political this cooperation.apotential Accordingly,label only for instancesof the regional trans-border states, both national localthe canbenefit. andthe isincludes community This category the of product ideathe by that, increasing theexchangesin close borders of tothe areas nation- referred to as to referred based cooperation are on this form could vision. They then which category, one be could intergovernmental andregional arrangements Preferential trade of borders nation-states. the and within arena within theinternational effects certain desirable canproduce governments of actions international the that theview mayexpress regionalism First, categories. into of variants different could begrouped only four nineversions regionalism, the vocabulary developed inthis ideologicalpaper, the embedded withinproject) of each the in (or, the background normative the account into if takes one However, integration. andpolitical integration, soft territories, of division administrative separatism, regional cross-border cooperation, bottom-up increase of autonomy, top-down increase of autonomy, cooperation, intergovernmental regional arrangements, trade These arepreferential debates. policy and academic from distinct as identified regionalism, contemporary of versions major nine has different presented of chapter In thefirst1.1 Table dissertation, the products. institutional of level the is at regionalism of instances the observe to way easiest The normative elements, and which, through political ideational will, may generate more institutions. representational, create and have regionalism of institutions all short, In projects. regionalist of generation the through particularly regionalism, regionalistideologies,least, belong institutions which the normative to field, produce of of forinstance, whilstregionalarrangements, regionalism, Not products. areinstitutional identity is identity.a regional In sense,regionsthis arenormative-representational products regional intergovernmental cooperation trans-border regionalism 68 . Third, regionalist products could also. Third, products regionalist . Second, regionalism may also be a be also may regionalism . Second, CEU eTD Collection Table 2.1Categories ofcontemporary regionalism and their normative background community. that should political fromindependent territories (quasi) produce politicalof the establishment specificity regional that claiming acommunity within order established challenges the that elite a political of existence the by characterised mostly is separatism regional autonomy, of functioning and degrees of the irrespective Abkhazia. However, and Ossetia South recently Such initiatives failed may be inKosovo like resultthe caseof and autonomies, more of territories (quasi)independent from the existent nation-states, based on a regional specificity. separatism All of All be withinthem of could grouped the of regionalism. variants territory” of national the division “administrative andthe autonomy” (more) efficient functioning of the polity. This is the case of the “increase of regional Regional separatism Regional Autonomy regionalism regionalism Trans-border cooperation intergovernmental Regional REGIONALISM CATEGORIES OF is a category in itself. It refers to the initiatives that intend to produce political produce intendto that initiatives the to refers in It itself. category isa states independent from the existent nation- political territories (quasi) produce should specificity Regional efficiently level makes the polity function more local the at necessary is Autonomy benefit local and the national community can the both ofnation-states, borders the to close areas in exchanges Through the increase of the nation-states of borders the within consequently within the international arena and effects desirable certain produce can Internationals actionof governments NORMATIVE BACKGROUND NORMATIVE autonomy regionalismautonomy 69 Regional separatism Administrative division of territory Top-down increase of autonomy Bottom-up increaseof autonomy Cross-border cooperation Regional tradeagreements intergovernmental cooperation Regional political VARIANT OF REGIONALISM VARIANT OF category. Finally, regional CEU eTD Collection interpretation gained primacy within the discipline, despite the relatively recent resurgence ofregional resurgence recent relatively the despite discipline, the within primacy gained interpretation interaction has beensubject of debate forseveral generations of regionalism scholarship. Until now, no framework. Whether this framework is essentially different from otherinstitutional frameworks of political 36 indeed group into afifth indeed category, group cases might They integration. softandof thefrequently typology treated political excludes scholarship and in synthesised first 1.1in Table chapter,may the one notice this that current within identified variants regionalism of inventory the to compared When beginning of ideology/normative section this background,(i.e. process, project, product). the at identified regionalism of elements possible the all have they that means which categories, which are based on the possible products of regionalism. They are full categories, previous of Table 2.1on the pagesummarizesthenormativebackground fourthese irrefutable. nor necessary neither is regionality of intensification the and strategies such between creating integration. link the aimingat However, emergence the of governmental strategies has favoured level,conceptual least at at such co-variation, of existence The circumstances. idea this may such co-variation the inobservations, that aparticularappears setof generate repeated through Intime, co-variation. butshowsonly certain any interdependence of existence the prove not does this field. Nonetheless, in another regionality decrease) of with anincrease(or in correlated frequently more onefield is increase of regionality an viz. time, given a inarea at acertain interaction and is increase of activity an of products interms observe can Whatone beonly butpostulated. observed cannot interdependence) (as integration regionalism, specific institutional whichcanbeidentifiedideologies, through products and irreversibleneighbouringfour spaceinanalmost unlike types way. of other the Yet, from the politically different make would thatarea process this area and certain a placewithin takes creation interdependence of process political social and a complex Atmost, one may argue that, as a regionalist political project, integration may generate an institutional 36 This is the reason for which, unlike in the case of the other four categories of categories four in thecaseof for other which, isthe unlike reason This the intensification ofregionality intensification regional integration 70 . One may also observe that sometimes an sometimes that observe also . Onemay , which would expresses the idea that the expresses would , which CEU eTD Collection intergovernmental cooperation takes place exclusively at international level and is the only is the and level international at exclusively place takes cooperation intergovernmental regional First, be obtained. could regionalism instances of five possible Accordingly, regions. of type the with relation in regionalism of variants the presents below 2.2 (2004). Diez and Wiener and (2000), see Rosamond debates, these of reviews For comprehensive studies. integration is This involved. thestates of territory entire the refers to consequently and governments national among place only takes that interaction regional is there Finally, regionalism. of variants respective the for as well as regions, of type this for nation-states of butfrontiers the do not transcend which includecooperation, cross-border as such statesarrangements, regionalist as a whole. ismanifests it where a of a nation-state theborders within is This nation-states. of territory administrative the only within manifested phenomena regional are Accordingly, there of nation states. borders the and regions of borders the between relations the on based regionalism and regions institutions of the nation-state. division spatial and theconcept is Currently, described particularly dominantthrough order. order this to the alternative an polity the within For institute thisRegions creates. reason,it regions the with one could differentiateApart among fromthe typesthis of classification, category of regionalism. beconsidered aseparate not should integration another way of these For manifested of fourreasons, regional alltheprevious regionalism. categories within looking be may it to regionality, of increase regionalismas or strategy, a political as either Furthermore, ideology. is the relation itbeinterdependence integration butpostulated. could Inwords, is not other solely an has interdependencean area. Asarguedabove, within atincreasing deliberately aiming integration be Therefore,strategies used refer meaningfully to those could only to integration. In short, regional integration is regional of an incomplete project the of category product of regionalism.institutional a specific identify not could one regionalism, 71 Trans-border domestic domestic region international regionalism, while the area while the regionalism, couldbe a good descriptor regionalism . Second, there are there Second, . . Table CEU eTD Collection authorities atas nationalmay be development These level. publicof referred to goods decision-making. and legitimacy political level of to the according be differentiated can elites political state, whichis in most political the which framework fourFirst, peoplelivecurrently, types of there intendor govern. Within to the community described through institutionsthe of nation-the are politicalpolitical elites, that is through those elites that voice claims related to the polity elitessociety through the from politically and arecoagulated Interests interest. are particular conveys a able designatedthat project isalsoapolitical regionalism dimensions, three these of irrespective least, Not to act for the defence and Table 2.2Theboundaries of regionalism regionalism. be of trans-border acase can separatism separatismneighbouring include demands of Inthis case,regional countries. territories where Country, Basque asthe are cases, such there However, nation-state. acertain within isseparatism mainly asit usually domestic, independencethe of pursues included territories of sub-national units are by definition confined to domestic regions. Finally, regional ofincrease of processes the autonomy regionalism. isinstancethus Third, an of trans-border regions and trans-border within takesplace arrangements, ascross-border cooperation, such internationalcooperation isto equivalent Second,regional regionalism. transnational intergovernmental regional reason, this For level. this at develops that regionalism of type Regional separatism Regional regionalism Autonomy regionalism Trans-border Regional intergovernmentalcooperation REGIONALISM CONTEMPORARY VARIANTS OF . They represent the community-wide interests and normally have a community- a have normally and interests community-wide the represent They . Domestic 72 X X - - Trans-border REGION X X - - International X - - - central CEU eTD Collection that political elites may have within the main system of political interaction acknowledged interaction political of system main the within have may elites political that legitimacy the than more nothing expresses types four the between distinction the sense, this In than of by theessence isparticipants. by another context provided rather the afeature or elite belonging toone fact, In another. one to worldviews andeven values transferring other, myseparatism. view, In four all types andof mayinteractelites influencepolitical each are inmajority localand contenders where usually demand for higher regional autonomy or minorities national inareaswhere may happen This of contenders. local line logic the with in andevenact theview local of in contenders express local instance, forwhich authorities to govern but notnecessarily within the established order of the polity. There might be cases, by want entire community.political accepted the elites of mechanisms These representations elites speak in name the of society the havingwithout been doso appointed to through thelast types of In contrast, political two usually within orderof polity.the theestablished elites govern political these entire the Consequently, community. accepted throughout public mechanismsthe of through two interest The first represent representation types to as referred community attype. Finally, local this of illustrations are level, claims, nation-wide have they as long as movements, political illegal such as thechallengers separatist Thesefor that. are mandate havinga community entire without the community, to represent movements,thisexpress arepolitical interestsattempt secondtype. butelites that Third,there private are a fourthauthorities type, may as to may bereferred level. These local at the interest foractbe the public to designated the nationalform that andthose in parliament national the elected parties political legitimacy. The wide government are illustrations of this type. Second, there . Local governments, local parliaments, city councils and mayors are examples of examples are mayors and councils city parliaments, local governments, Local . . Political parties that are not represented in the national parliaments andcertain in parliaments national the are notrepresented that parties . Political local contenders political elites that express private interests but attempt to represent the represent to attempt but interests express private that elites political . 73 are political elites local CEU eTD Collection dialogue with the central governmental elites. Third, autonomy is autonomy a process Third, regionalism elites. dialogue central the governmental with close to national borders. Yet, for legal reasons, such cooperation also requires a constant trans-border regionalism usually involves the collaboration of local authorities from areas Second, elites. local some governmental of participation caninvolve the or challengers, comes to this whenit are atnational mainactor level.the central authorities Therefore, public goods type of regionalism.brings together those political elites designated to act for the defence and development of are more likely to involve. First, by definition, regionalSome intergovernmental cooperation arrangements ofelites some types of regionalism types four inthe of each Finally, importance. secondary is to acquire power over the canentire community. For this type be,of elites, regionalism is only of however, challengerslikely leastbe contrast, arethe involved inprocesses asto theirgoal regionalist contested the polity. In throughout aslegitimate are accepted instances that in those particularly bylegitimacy, ideological elites also have an important role their to inDue the development state. nation the of of regionalism,institutions the and regions between relation the and regions involved in regionalist projects, as their goals are strongly related tocertain representation of Regionalism involves different types of elites. Local contenders are most likely to be Table 2.3 Political Table Political ofinterest elitesthe representation 2.3 and one. utopian a have types two last the while legitimacy, ideological an have elites political typesfirst of 1936).Accordingly,ideological two utopian and (Mannheim respectively the legitimacies political opposing main two the to refer and terminology Mannheim’s by the community in which they act. To illustrate more sharply this distinction, I use Karl LEVEL OF INTEREST REPRESENTATION Community wide Local Central authorities Central Local authorities Local Ideological 74 POLITICAL LEGITIMACY Local contender Local Challenger Utopian CEU eTD Collection identity. In this way, regional identity as latent regionality from spheresis from transformed other regionality as latent identity regional In way, this identity. the same time, at but regionalidentity produces cooperation least, regional intergovernmental area.Not the as a regionalist and within nation-states of participantthe within theborders desirable can effects produce level regional at action intergovernmental that view the expresses project, regionalism international level, normative At agreements. by such itinstituted collaboration of may structures the and rely agreements intergovernmental regional on through identified be may it level, particularinstitutional At driven thatengagesmostlyprocess traditions ofmore central the neighbouringgovernments countries. elite- is an this section, the throughout As showed is treated. regionalism) (international of regional cooperation intergovernmental of regional category particular the only In this dissertation, Table 2.4Regionalismandthe representation ofinterest relations. these 2.4 summarizes equation. may tothe Table add challengers sometimes though contenders, Therefore,is it commonly involvinga triangular process the ideological elites and the local level. community-wide local the at at both and of polity the narrative communitarian existent national territory. Lastly,in regional separatism, by definition,local contenders challenge the the administrate contenders, local by contested sometimes elites, ideological which through Regional separatism Regional regionalism Autonomy regionalism Trans-border Regional intergovernmentalcooperation VARIANTS OF CONTEMPORARY VARIANTS OF REGIONALISM Central authorities Central Ideological elites contenders Local Ideological elites Ideological elites 75 Major actors Major INTEREST REPRESENTATION Local contenders Local contenders Local Local authorities Local potential actors Minor or other or Minor Challengers Challengers CEU eTD Collection Therefore, the concept of regionality is not enough to generate a narrative about the degree the anarrativeabout generate to enough not is of regionality concept the Therefore, time. over stability acquirecertain products regional which through political process the to not but is perceived reality which in way the to refers indicator this integration, for which space However,like of that fluctuates. politicaldistinctiveness the the usual proxies theway for isin indicator regionality an decrease of increase or the areas, in neighbouring than more frequent are elements some space in a particular fact that the to refers regionality of concept the through be might paradigm level integration the through regional than at reality political assess to way normative less A required. is alternative an products of regionalism. If this paradigmis dueto abandoned impossibilitythe falsify it,to the about also but process the about only not narrative a provided has integration differently, the way in which certain areas develop and remain politicallycould about vision that a offer hastheadvantage paradigm integration Yet,the regionalism. distinct from others. To put it postulated butnotdemonstrated. For reason,this integration is notadistinctive variant of into Thisa regionalist not integration product. happensbecause canbe as a only product but project a regionalist into can be ideology is integration transformed that an that argued I alsoproduces particularformsproducts. of that regionalist background specific normative ideologies. In this sense, various forms of regionalism can be differentiated based on a like that, from strategies informed projects the which they by are emerged, particular regionalismarguing as project, regionalismis that product as theresultof particular political and product as regionalism between distinction the made I section, previous the In 2.3 Introducing regional cohesiveness projects. intergovernmental regional of creation for the basis of the some may provide which regionality, actual into 76 regionality . Since CEU eTD Collection First, one may observe the particular institutional and discursive design that is instituted design that and discursive institutional may one theparticular First, observe also assessed ontwodimensions –material (institutional)normative-representational. and can these be logics chapter, products atthebeginning of briefly sketched constructivistthis the Following and process. ofinternational regionalism asproject representational products normative- the to and institutional the to refers it instance, for regionalism, international caseof particular In the interaction. of political but products the to theprocess refernot to From its design, regional cohesiveness is an-output oriented concept. In other words, it does dimension. thus form. and group of they the respective actors of particularthe generates representations a group For this reason, actas some At factthat actors thesametime, the act. is anormative-representational distinct the concept of regional cohesiveness has also a discursive institutions, of certain theframework placewithin take world material the within interactions such as written physically results world thathappenin are actions material the andproduce distinguishable texts or a on theimposition of issuethird an or party embargo declaration a particular economic on the sudden of a common stop adoption the of agreement, an signature instance, the For world. material of trade actions occurringthe within within regional refersto cohesiveness definition. First, this relations. asagroup space actandrepresentthemselves Since I share the view that which I define as the 1999) and Thoenig (2003). Forcomprehensive overviews of institutionalism and its arguments, see Hall and Taylor(1996), Peters (1996, 37 As a possible solution for this problem,propose I the concept of in occur respect. this may changesthat the about or period a certain has during product a regional stability of that March Olsen and (1984, 1989,1998) Olsenand (2001) present this institutionalist argument in much detail. 37 I call this dimension institutional. Second, the representation of a group as a representation group the of institutional. Icall Second, this dimension degree whichto a group of actors group of inhabiting a limited contiguous 77 . Two different dimensions may be identified be may dimensions different Two . regional cohesiveness , CEU eTD Collection which the political phenomenon of regionalism develops. Using the framework of the strata that urged the creation of the regional arrangements, as well as to the larger socio-political in requisites specific security the refer to circumstances Such of emergence regionalism. the led to that political circumstances particular the mostly refers Thisto context their context. of developbein products regionalism the time, not(meaning)fully could outside understood these all Since evolve. they in which framework conceptual the and interest their actors, betweenhuman interaction of is result that the context emerges inaparticular It dimension. Although itis a regional concept, product-oriented cohesiveness has alsoa dynamic groups. describe the specifics of a regional group, helpingthus situating them in with relation other as to be may referred aspects four world. These to the institutional institutional and discursivepractices. internal rhetoric as dimension this discursive I refer to grouping. regional of documents respective the this instance, official for maybeassessedfrom case international regionalism, the of and draws this boundarythe between and respectivethe group rest the of world.the In the is dimension, there discursive a way itself represents in particular which group internally the initiatives.these Irefer tothis institutional as dimension government, as well as through the work of more technical bodies and such asstate of the secretariatsheads the of meetings of through develop initiatives intergovernmental groupthe within the particularframework of a regional initiative.instance, For regional of interaction allow the that structures certain creates regionalism international means that this dimension, institutional the on above, as example same the use To regionalism. through Discursive practices (or practices Discursive goals, objectives and of programs regional the implemented are grouping (i.e. activities). . The second level on which the products can be assessed is that of is that be assessed can products the which on level second The . external rhetoric Institutional practices ) refer to the wayin) refer to presents which itself group the 78 situational layers refer to the way in which the institutional design because they because . On the On . CEU eTD Collection Fig. 6Dimensions andelements ofregional cohesiveness strata meaningof production framework. summarizes all these aspects ofa regional grouping withinthe ensemble social of political and phenomena. Figure6below regional cohesiveness and places helpbecause they thespecific establishing location political, identity socio-historical and of them in relation with the historical and political context). These four aspects may be referred to as to may be referred These four aspects context). political and historical be phenomenon meaningfully from studiedseparately itscannot (i.e.particular environment regional a of the consistency itgroupassesses in but “thrown time” object of a political measurement in a discursive andinstitutional background. words, regional Inother a mereiscohesiveness not on acertain asdeveloping regional cohesiveness represent constructivist I thinking, corresponds toits normative-representational dimension. However, inline with constitutes the institutional dimension of the context stratum, while the second type of meaning briefly production in outlined introduction,the first the type of circumstances longue durée perspective. Consequently, regionalism as a political a as regionalism Consequently, perspective. 79 locational layers CEU eTD Collection issues 1999b, (Hettne 2005).In this sense,regionalism isamultilevel and multidimensional interdependence between and an inextricable cope need the withlocal global to particular tendencies, regional and global between tension the of a product is regionalism international Nations University. From partiallythis (neo)Marxian, partially (neo)liberal perspective, by Björn Hettne withinframework of the regionalistthe developed studies atthe United version indeveloped the agenda, particularly (NRA/T) Approach/Theory NewRegional the in visible most probably are elements constructivist import to attempts significant most The arguments and the field hasnotbeen permeated muchby social constructivist debates and. regionalism by scholarship is dominated (neo)liberal, (neo)realist and (neo)Marxian international regionalism. As already observedin the previous to chapter, international constructivism social accommodating for useful is also cohesiveness Regional suggested. farand only not international used study asmost to the so examples of limited one relations, is concept science a political cohesiveness thisinstance. regional reason, For for autonomy, and separatism regional include These created. are in which regions all cases to applicable category isa general in regional cohesiveness from action, of political others terms distinct and regional autonomy. Since it describes the way in which certain areas develop and remain separatism regional of cases such asthe regionalism, of categories other to but regionalism international to only not be applicable may that concept is a cohesiveness regional Second, products. on regionalist for research integration, especially and interdependence the conceptactors does notact orrepresent itself as group, then there isno cohesiveness. For this reason, may dissertation. First, unlike integration interdependence,or itis falsifiable.When a group of be regardedthis focus the is this as regionalism, international with relation in mostly them discuss as The concept of moreregional cohesiveness has several advantages in front of its rival paradigms. I suitable to analytical purposes than those of 80 CEU eTD Collection institutionalism. and (neo)liberalism to also but constructivism social to only not close are embedded interdependency. In sense,this notion the of regional in vision cohesiveness and the whichis form)formoreneutral thisinfiltrated by could which opt isnot concept, vision any of intergovernmentalist liberal inthe (especially liberalism mind, in Community European the caseof logic particular the and with functionalist from was developedthe that integration of notion the using of Instead functionalism. than easier much even and concept this regional cohesiveness is a proxy for integration. The liberal paradigm can also incorporate From perspectives, such ofinterdependence. of resultcertain be the types considered isa group may fact cohesive functionalism the that forand theNRA/T, “hardcore” instance, Interestingly, regional cohesiveness may be congruent with the integration paradigm. For debates. regionalism international the into constructivism (conventional) social consistently more introduce maybeameansto cohesiveness regional For these reasons, concept. constructivist Due tothe way inwhichit was defined, regional issocial cohesiveness a (conventional) agenda. a critical have aim to not does cohesiveness of regional concept The regionalism. international to theories critical accommodating of is ameans NRA/T the Therefore, identity of dynamics. question particularly tothe sensitive not are 1999a)but(Hettne longer are nowhere unique actor the relations inanincreasingly states power world complex istype inequalities of largely touncover research and mechanismsof critical, the aiming this of agenda the Yet, 2003). (Hettne borders national transcends often that phenomenon 81 CEU eTD Collection in chapter 8.in chapter mostly dissertation, the of part third in the cohesiveness regional of analysis in the used later relation with the member states, and sustainability.The categories defined in this chapter are in as within aswell initiative, of regional goals,the power structure scope, according to initiatives, regional of taxonomy rigorous more a propose also I Finally, cooperation. intergovernmental of regional andpractices rationale for assessingthe tool easiest the as paradigm security for national the choosing argue and I regionalism international cooperation. intergovernmental regional of forms current of analysis the for shortcomings several Atidentify and regionalism of nature the the assesses scholarship regionalism international samewhich time, in the way examine I section, second the In organizations. international types of other and I propose differentiate between regional not Ishow,does law,a as which ininternational public defined different as I nature of the examine regionalism First, international regionalism. of specificities these grill for anddescribing these inform a particular itfrom forms of other regionalism differentiate the that specificities hascertain regionalism the dynamic international terms, spaceinstitutional In arena. ofinternational in the regional governments national of cohesiveness.developed by aprocess and aproduct aproject, ideology, itis specifically, an More level. In this chapter, I international at mostly place takes address that process an elite-driven as defined was regionalism) international (or cooperation intergovernmental regional chapter, previous the In T C HE FIELD OF INTERNATIONAL REGIONALISM HAPTER 3 82 CEU eTD Collection discussionon the legal nature of regional arrangements. activities who are not representatives of states (ILC 2004). Itis this second part that is more relevant forthe immunities of organisationsinternational andofficials, their experts andotherpersons engaged in their international organisations, while the second intended to establishthe principles ruling the status, privileges and 40 international law (ILC 1947). “progressive development of international law and its codification,” particularly with respect to public Nations (ILC 1947, of 2004). League the of Accordingcommittee to its Statute,similar a on art.based in 1947 1, the role created was of it the Commission and Assembly is to promote UN General the by elected 39 (1997),Cassese (2001), ShawDegan (2003) and Evans instance, (2006). for see, issues ofthese discussions detailed For practices. customary the including procedures, However, inone way oranother, international relations. law as codified byUN bodies usually international most covers ofin the legality of sources important other are arrangement each to specific procedures 38 system. Nations United the around created Organizations Law of International mainly the within on The international regional in arecodified procedures organisations way a more unified 3.1 Thelegal nature ofinternational regionalism created International Law Commission (ILC) of the United Nations. United the of (ILC) Commission Law International created phenomenon. topicincludedin In 1962, this researchprogramme was the newly of the practitioners increased suddenly aware and both became organisations andscholars of the international of number the as II, War World the of aftermath in the attention some gained formulate uniform rules applicable to all of them. For this reason, regional organisations regional reason, all For this of them. to applicable rules uniform formulate impossible to it be almost would varied sothat are too regional that organisations argument the 1970, 1971a).The dominantposition supported 1968, 1969, this 1963,1967, topic (ILC on convention multilateral a of articles for drafting basis the constituted that sixreports the of in all highlighted a point ILC, the within held were views opposing two and significant werequite regional organisations about debates The beone. acontroversial appeared to and between regional of universal particularly discerning classification, organisations, From very the beginning,mainly due the diversity to of existing organisations, the problem and international organisations. states between thirty years, ILC the anddebated documents differentconcerning drafted relationsthe France proposed the topic in 1958. The first part dealt with the representation of states in their relations with relations their in of states representation the with dealt part first The 1958. in topic the proposed France The International Law Commission is a group of internationally recognized experts of international law and practices Customary force. into currently one only the not UNis the around created system legal The 38 The question of international (including The had organisations of question regional arrangements) 83 40 39 Then, for more than CEU eTD Collection instituted by the Law of Treaties. In this sense, apart from their scope, there is no significantthe provisions by solely is given arrangements intergovernmental regional of status legal the context, this In of the treaty thatNations (UNGeneral Assembly 1992). constitute them, bytheUnited endorsed a decision drafting, the discontinuing ILCrecommended the matter, as well as in the in giventhegovernments’ disinterest legalfurtherpursuing reverse, terms. Quite the by the go rulesnot did organisations regional of character the on discussions and the law, international of procedures codification the in direction this of initiation the since passed a century half almost Although 2004). (ILC of number ratifications required yetin lacks the as it force,not is convention itsyears this signature, after eventhirty 1975).However, Organizations International withRelations InternationalOrganizations of a Universal Character is the This instrument. legal a into was transformed In 1975,this draft 284-7). 1971b, of follow (ILC this the provisions could regional organisations This meansthat such organisations. of under auspices the conferences and convenedbyor to character of universal other than organisations those applyinternational decide notto possibility the respective the whether provisions to or to are not even mentioned in any of the draft articles. However, the documentleft open to states regional organisations fact, In to regional organisations. do same with the respect not things itbutdid (art.1) aspossible ascomprehensively universalcharacter of defined organisations Assembly, General UN the to Commission Law International the by proposed draft final The leavewould asignificantgap. regional organisations. Therefore, excluding regional organisations from the UN codification mightdiffernot and universal character appreciably from between similar states relations idea and of between relations the emphasized states position alternative a organisations that The organs. codification own their have many as rules own their develop to free be should Viennaon theRepresentation ConventionStates in of their 84 (UN Conference on CEU eTD Collection seems to be more diverse than ever, the distinction between economic and political and betweeneconomic distinction the be ever, more than diverse seems to regionalism War Cold the of aftermath inthe although and advances scholarly such Despite while thelatter aimed conflict(Nyecontrolling 1971). at integration, economic first targeted the categories wasthat two the between main difference The time. that at organisations governmental international of types dominant the been have Nye, according would to which, “macroregional organisations”, to political organisations” “macroeconomic between comparison the introduces he arrangements, regional 1960s arrangements as variations of samethe regional logic.notably, Most in his of analysis the undertaken until 1970s.JosephNyeis the first the militaryto among treat and economic been considered had foractivity regionalist classes of two areas,the research between existed that separation a long time as verymilitary– blocks and economic respectively. organisations, more Partially rigiddue tothe different species agreements regional of category acertain with wereeach dealing theory integration regional and noand studies serioussecurity War, World Second the of aftermath the In regionalism. comparisonpolitical was The most common 3.2.1 The bipolar differentiationmodel operated3.2 From security to welfare and back in old regionalism was between economic and viewpoint. from is particular itthis treated chapter, the of remaining the In multilateralism. international to in contrast than regionalism perspective of potentialinstitutionalthe withindifferences theinternational universe of countries. Therefore, the field internationalof regionalism could be described rather from the cooperation. The only specificity of it isthatregionalism develops among neighbouring international of aspecies than more nothing is cooperation international regional Inother words, anduniversal legal between organisations. difference regional organisations 85 CEU eTD Collection trade. From a political perspective, there are three categories of initiatives. First, there would there First, initiatives. of categories are three there perspective, a political From trade. built aroundbe would Europe, regionalism macroeconomic/bloc hand, other the On Americas world. the throughout found or Japan and are visibleintegration,economicin small agreements general trade which (RTAs), regional could be mostfor notably schemes microregional are there hand, one the On through arrangements. of types two be would the flows of there would be five combining size Accordingly, organisations. the the of thewith economy-politics dimensions variants of regionaland for instance,and Hurrell (1995), Hurrell classify initiatives(1995a, 1995b), by regional projects. From Fawcett arrangements. regional of typology refining this at attempt a certain is also There an economic point of 1999, Calleyaview, 2000). there andHook Kearns Shaw 2005, Marchand, and 2003, Marchand,Bøås,andShaw 1999,Bøås, 1999a,1999b,2001, and (Hettne core periphery inhegemony, terms initiatives of regional isview in neo-Gramscian whichframe flavour, particularly with studies present a strong This Mittelman Söderbaum, Öjendal and 2001b). 2001, 2003, 2000, Schulz, 1999, Mistry development is essentialeconomic that premise is basedon the economic regionalism inclination towards the for the centrality1999). Asimilar could preference within beobserved also NRA/T,although in the case this of a region in the worldincreasingly studied 1995a,1995b, (Hurrell Payne Gamble and andMilner 1996, Mansfield system also are arrangements (Hettne political the though initiatives, economic regional of analysis 1999a, 2000). In visibleBreslinfor is this there the conceptual Higgott context, a and preference (Wyat-Waltermarkets accompanies of phenomenon 1995, that theglobalization world with impactandasa process political isasan regionalism economic instance, portrayed for studies, In IPE (NRA/T). approach/theory new regionalism the with its intersection at or perspective (IPE) economy political international an from developed research regionalism in frequently appears it form, classic almost an In maintained. been has initiatives 86 CEU eTD Collection of the bipolar system seem to be rather relics of another era, despite some attempts of reform. attempts some despite era, ofanother relics berather to seem system bipolar the of collapse the after that and reasons ideological for mainly War Cold the during created were that organisations employing term, this Fawcett Hurrell (1995),aswell and Hurrell (1995a)openly as very to refer those large 41 economy-politics distinction. economy-politics state of regionalism. Table current the than War preoccupations Cold the 3.1more adequately reflect to seems classification on the next page summarizes theseconfrontation is no longerdifferent an open goal for the existing regional variantsorganisations,since addition, In way. therigid rather in a largely, and, of present still is thedistinction politics the economy-largerand Yet, goals. political purposes economic security, security, political alongmilitary categories intothree linesof the organisations of flexible classification more a slightly yield logics three The confrontation. and management conflict cooperation, These are maybecreated. organisations uponwhichregional logics among three ofinternationalframework organisation theory.for instance, Archer(1992), distinguishes A more refined view on distinctionthe waseconomy-politics proposedwithin the division. this along described satisfactorily not is regionalism international of landscape complex increasingly the that observe authors the that fact the despite present, heavily is still politics and economy between distinction the Furthermore, exist. not did agreements economic range middle if as large, and small into only divided are initiatives regionalism inofeconomic the while case largeorganisations, and medium-sized between small, fully consistent with the criteria it employs. Forpolitical regionalism, the distinction is made is not however, of refinement, ThisWar. sort Cold the after space communist former in the developed micro-regional theagreements bodies such as are there level.continental Finally, Organization for Security (OSCE), inand Cooperation which Europe developed usually at States (OAS). American of such era, as Organization old of bygone big a relics dinosaurs”, be“regionalist The use of “dinosaurs” is not a metaphor for expressing the merely the size of the arrangement. When 41 To these, one may add those meso-regional security groupings such as the as such groupings security meso-regional those add may one these, To 87 CEU eTD Collection kept underdeveloped through underdevelopedmeanskept through the 2001). of economic regionalism (Hettne arepolitically globe areason the some argue that to of regionalism in context the economy and politics between distinction classic the uses that influence neo-Gramscian of (NRA/T) approach/theory newregionalism is the A inpoint case agendas. policy and research normative highly favours it is that economy-politics dichotomy the with problem Another goals. of complexity the issueof notsolve the does sizecriterion becausethe happens inadequacy maintains even when through refined introductionthe of a size dimension. This Warvisible regionalistthe Furthermore, period. post-Cold the withinof the topography particularly much in higher of than suggests.goals, Thisisterms is division this especially arrangements, of regional variety the of regional organisations, legalnature the debates about economy-politics line. The main shortcomingitsis of roughness. As suggested already in the the along initiatives regional of classification traditional this with problems several are There Table 3.1Traditional perspectives oninternational regionalism

COOPERATION CONFRONTATION GOAL

Economic Conflict Trade Confrontation integration management Macropolitical regional Warsaw Pact, SEATO) (E.g. EEC, Comecon) Macroeconomic REGIONALISM organisations organisations (E.g. NATO, (E.g. OLD THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE Micro-regional (E.g. CEFTA) (E.g. OAU, OAS, NATO) OAU,OAS, (E.g. (E.g. Visegrád Group) Visegrád (E.g. (E.g. EU, Mercosur) security groupings (bloc) regionalism 88 Macroeconomic Micro-regional Meso-regional (E.g. OSCE) “dinosaurs” Regionalist schemes bodies REGIONALISM NEW (E.g. NATO, Warsaw Pact, ORGANIZATION THEORY ORGANIZATION Economic and political and Economic security organisations (E.g. EU, ECOWAS, Military and political Political and security INTERNATIONAL GCC, SAARC) (E.g. ASEAN) (E.g. organisations organisations SEATO) CEU eTD Collection existing initiatives alongside the economic and political dimensions. To a certain extent, the extent, certain a To dimensions. political and economic the alongside initiatives existing differentiate among to difficultmake task the very would which significantly complex, be is is to new regional that fact the considered regionalism classifying processes certain points on which there seem beto converging views. Most importantly for the issue of are there Yet, fields. research related other and regimes international trade, international multilateralism, regionalism, economic on literature contemporary the of much of on strategieswhich twointhe of better would work a givensituation. core the are also They noagreementis policy-makers, asthere for provide a dilemma arguments andstrategic-trade regionalism betweenopen 2005).Thesecontroversies Kubota Milner and Panagaryia 1999, held system (Bhagwati 1997, withinthe World TradeOrganization 1993, Bergsten (WTO) negotiations and liberalization trade of effectthe the be rather would regionalism economic new Therefore, free-market. and mechanisms of the spontaneously arise this would through wouldlead tooptimum specialization in the region regional eventually (and to integration) level regional at interaction sustained economic maintaining that this interpretation, contest of Thesupporters andMilner1999). economic regionalism (Mansfield projects on the Coldafter for strong the account Warwould andin suddeninterest regional rather the part of(Gamble and in Payne 1996).Strategic trade worldmarketa freer like theone developed policy makersarena in international the position a leader maintain acquire or to are able ensure they and wouldargument the ultimately formulation, rough a In argument. regionalism open the and argument explainis that the decadeslongregionalism so-called between scholarship, the debate strategic-trade the newenvironment. This becomes visible whenwave one looks closer to the key issue of economic of have formight War post-Cold the muchanalytical particularly not value, regional politics and economy between distinction the isthat limitation disturbing most the Perhaps advances the idea that states must act strategically to protect key sectors and key sectors protect to mustactstrategically states idea that the advances 89 open regionalism strategic trade CEU eTD Collection dialogue in the region. In this indialogue In this sense, region. the of specifically, mainpurpose the cooperation. Thus, it covers simultaneously a wide range of sectors of of itsuch as activity, of a widerange simultaneously covers cooperation. Thus, sectors as to referred problems. The initiatives more findingrules inclined those specific of to partnership towards solutions common to thatthe set that those from aim range arrangements regional at dimension, settingformal the On initiatives. the rules and offerFirst, general guidelinesone may maypolitics debate. be distinguish economic-the to solution asanalternative is proposed new classification a same time, among Atthe for analysis. as relevant out singled are regionalism international of features common the different several section, this In suggests. premise this than diverse ismore regionalism international that logicsobserve to fail not could one grounds, empirical on Furthermore, regionalism. that reflectindeed alone,addmuch political. Yet, proposition this cannot value to study analytical the of the aimsOne of the mainof premises regional of this3.2.2 Afour-dimension alternative research is that the essence of international regionalismFalk R.2003). is 2003, 1999b, (Hettne political ultimately is interactions, economic mainly implies that one on economic interdependency (Mistry 2000). In words,allother regionalism,including the political will,a finding thatcontradicts beliefsofmanythe focused economists exclusively without effective or really possible not is regionalism economic arguethat convincingly decision-making political with relation in trade on research Recent artificial. is agreements andpolitical between economic the distinction because may differentiate appear to difficulty notdeny does existencethe of open (Gambleregionalism andPayne1996).In fact, the This, however, projects. regionalist in current all arepresent logic actions and strategic-trade political , while the others may be referred to as to referred may be others , while the political political regionalism arrangements is to establish and maintain political maintain and establish is to arrangements 90 provides a general framework provides for ageneral policy arrangements. More CEU eTD Collection different areas of common interest. This interest. common areas of different in in projects to developregional may beorder created initiatives regional Alternatively, political development, dialogue,exchanges cultural trade and environmental protection. needs rationale. One may argue that in each society, all actions could be reduced to just two just to be reduced could actions all society,in each that may argue One rationale. needs basic the of is that beranged can arrangements regional which upon dimension second The scheme may apolicy be considered that one. activities, illicit of incooperation specificseveral field such culture, as navigation combatingor traffic and text of initiativean identifies themain as goal of groupingthe establishmentstructures of founding the when Alternatively, otherwise. suggest not do organisation the of activities and declarations political the as long as one, a political as rather classified be may arrangement members with haveassociated establishingof purpose the aforum dialogue,of that the that states arrangement of a regional if Charter the instance, For this continuum. on indicator of couldbe position the initiatives agood of respective the constitutive documents and political main The continuum. politics-policy the on move time in may organisation asan bounded, context is logics therefore two betweenthe distinction The union. a political into arrangement economic an from transformed gradually has which Community, Economic caseof European forthe the instance, hasbeen, of foractivity. more sectors This cooperation of basis the generate can regionalisms policy time, same At the threat. security common a or natural as dealingwith such calamities problems, specific canaddress initiatives oriented more politically circumstances, in instance,particular For exclusive. necessarily regionalism, are just a special case of policy regionalism. These twologics are not economic of case a classic considered are scholarship mainstream in which areas, trade context, In this policy regionalism. bemay thatproduce instance, issues for countries, problems. and a several neighbouring Freenavigation common pollution control river on to are by usually are more that issuesparticular generated limitedin that targets scopeand policy regionalism 91 is more sector-specific, as it as sector-specific, more is CEU eTD Collection security-welfare balance cannot be established otherwise than post-hoc. than otherwise beestablished cannot balance security-welfare controlled to the extent are that they exchanges can because no longer ofwelfare produce decrease drastic a enoughto lead welfare.may of security Not least, increasing the the threshold point, some at for the optimal 43 42 instance, number when,the within of arrangement, an ishighersecurity-enhancing elements For respectively. enhancing, welfare and security of mechanisms and elements the initiative it toidentify iseach within morefeature, appropriate based enhancing particular on one insteadmeaningless. Therefore, of regional classifying security into organisations welfareor rather types two into initiatives regional of division clear-cut a make intricacies Such instance, could beregardednot only security as butenhancers also aswelfarefacilitators. military thisfor enhancing (Zulean2007).For reason, security organisations, welfare whose degree publicis of good achievement strongly possibility connected tothe of consequently becould consideredassecurity same Atthe enhancing. is security time, a aim providingdevelopment atamore securesocietal and environment, and economic For1991). instance,initiatives aimingatfacilitating cultural orenhancingexchanges trade military economic, nature and political to societal and environmental (Buzan ones 1993, of those from arevaried, ranging Thesefactors factors. different of is acomplex security From this (Wolfersperspective, values1962, 150). maybeattacked fearthe such that of absence an values as and certain to threats of absence the refers to that category a general political is hand, Inthis security and, other the on security defineddissertation, economy. as and military hand, one the on between, operated one the with equivalent not is welfare inclined, whilemore are others welfareThis inclined. distinctionbetween security and security aremore some initiative. Therefore, an addressed equally within not goals are two initiatives aim at enhancing both security and welfare. However, for efficiency reasons, these a minimal security. bewithout developednot could whilewelfare, welfare basic needs, security welfare. and security needs, basic The relation between security and welfare is not linear. More security may mean more welfare. Nevertheless, welfare. more mean may security More linear. not is welfare and security between relation The This idea can be derived, for instance, from the concept of liberty as it was framed by Isaiah Berlin (1992). 42 Security Security is pursued for allowing development the of 92 43 Regional CEU eTD Collection solution may be to focus on the categories that only one dimension can generate and then and generate can dimension one only that categories the on focus be to may solution all these four made.Since beeasily could research choices based on cooperation which intergovernmental dimensionswelfare-security dimensions does not provide, as such, and are a clear-cut typology politics-policy the of along regional distinction the above, different outlined briefly advantages its Despite aspects is moredescribed. regionalism accurately international Inthis way, contemporary initiatives. of the sameflexibleit of accounts for conceptualizingprovides theframework evolutionthe regional of objectin time, point different at weight different a have to logics four the of allowing by words, other study, a possiblemodel allows the four logics beto simultaneously present, although in different quantities. In samethe The andsecurity at time. welfare enhancing aim can organisations at fluid, while is orientation policy and political the between distinction the that shows it matrix, four-cell a in dimensions two the representing than Rather relations. these expresses above 7 Figure Fig. 7.Orientation ofregional arrangements develop. initiatives regional in which continuums of a field israther dimension security-welfare considered asecurity-enhancing one. Inthislike sense, the political-policy the dimension, be may arrangement an such goals, security pursue explicitly countries member the and GOAL region. dialogue in the political maintain and Establish POLITICAL allowing each of allowingcountries each of participantthe Promote welfare for participant countries through the development of common to feel more secureatregional level. projects and smoother exchanges at exchanges and smoother projects Create structures andCreate structures instruments OR I E N T A T I O N Security-enhancing Welfare-enhancing regional level. regional 93 POLICY projects in projects specific fields of common of fields Develop regional interest. CEU eTD Collection from the viewpoint of the human securitywhile perspective, security ofthesocietal for supporters the of threat istheobject nation concept, the entire humankind is the atsecurity, national of for concern object remains classic Thestate the objectstake, of the threat. both at to according distinct are they above, outline brief in the mentioned as First, criteria. several to bemappedaccording Theycan concepts. these three nextpage presents Table 3.2on the repression Program Nations Development1994). (United and criminality epidemics, hunger, as such realities life everyday by rather but war as such by fear events triggered of necessarily the cataclysmic is not insecurity majority people, of the for that view the expresses which security, human of concept the through question Finally, et al.hasbeen national of security concept 1993). the put completely under the threat, but also the identity of different communities, especially nationalthe identity (Wæver this perspective, in the contemporary world not only state sovereignty would be an object of to According security. of societal concept with the has been supplemented security national conceptof the (Buzan politics, Second, society economics, and environment 1983, 1991). -military, sectors interdependent but fivebe distinct described along to came Buzan, Barry work the mostly following which, concept, security national the of arestructuring been has there First, accommodate aspects. other to enlarged security on perspective 1980s, the longercouldbe no easily exclusively assessed on Therefore, grounds. these in already the modernincreasing conflicts However, complexity the aggressionof 1991). deterrent (Walt and forces military of presence the through interest national of protection the to mainly identified. The oldest of them is the concept of national security. Traditionally, this referred are concepts security contemporary different three (2007), and Ghica In ChecaHidalgo for analysis. the mostbeenitmany granted attention developed and around that could beused categories has security literature, the In dimensions. three other for implications and relations the treat 94 CEU eTD Collection destabilize the internal cohesion of the respective nation. The unstable states areidentified as states unstable The nation. respective the of cohesion internal the destabilize could which vicinity, its in states unstable of existence the by as well as migration, usually through cultures, different with contact bythe nation isthreatened the concept, such as the actors, non-states andincreasingly are states theother of main threat source the terroristperspective, organizations. is The source From insecurity of alsoconceptualizedsecurity national differently.the Source Instead, from the viewpoint of the societal security Table concepts 3.2Contemporary security individuals, as well as with the quality lifeof in different areas around the globe. is embedded into less notions, asitabstract ismostly concerned with survival the of view security human the Instead, most. valued is nation the framework security societal the territory are the main valuemust that be defended against any of aggression,kind whilein national especially and sovereignty paradigm, security national the In of threat. object valueslevel.individual with differentto viewsexpress These andthe collective respect

HUMAN SOCIETAL NATIONAL SECURITY SECURITY SECURITY : Adapted after Checa Hidalgo and Checa after : Adapted Hidalgo Ghica (2007) Political security community Security of the security Personal security Environmental security Health Food security Economic security Security Nation of the polity security Societal security Environmental Economic security Political security security Military CATEGORIES Humankind Individuals State OBJECT OF OBJECT THREAT 95 instability Social Individuals states Unstable states Unstable cultures Alien actors Non-state Other states SOURCES OF THREAT life of Quality Survival Identity unity National Sovereignty integrity Territorial THREATEN VALUES society International states Affected society International states Affected states Affected INTERVENTION SUBJECT OF CEU eTD Collection in the political sector, the different national interests are articulated through political through arearticulated interests national thedifferent sector, in the political instance, For cooperation. of several areas may identify of one security, five sectors of these level intergovernmental placecooperation at takes along five these Within dimensions. each Rather, five categories. into be classified could regionalism mean that not does Barry Buzan by proposed of fivesecurity lines of sectors the along be the analysed can security national that fact the However, level. international at act they when especially sovereignty, and national territory the safeguarding with concerned areprimarily elites central governmental nation, entire the of cohesiveness identity the safeguarding for also act they although terms, In security of interests represent. they community entire the elites defendthe defined, these role.important Asthey were most play the elites in central governmental which process elite-driven asan classified was international regionalism previous In the chapter, concept. may beRegional cooperation intergovernmental regardedasfitting national best the security insecurity manage theeffectsof DevelopmentProgram Nations 1994). (United international society should be as legitimate as the nation states to act in order to prevent and (Wæver human etal.Finally,vision 1993). security forward idea the the theputs that security paradigm of national the than inthe case is much accepted easily unstable states, of effects the limiting for particularly intervention, international although camp, security attribute of each sovereign but remain strategic of atthe types decisions the threat, especially for certain preventing state (Walt 1991). forthispurpose, with states other can cooperate ofintervention.main They the actor A similar view are states affected the security perspective, national isFrom traditional ofinsecurity.the effects shared the of withinsource the removing for intervention of terms in theapproaches different also societaltrigger ofinsecurity the nature views by produced instability.factors different on other social Such asdifferent as well dictatorships, personal or attacks assuicidal such actions, individual also a main ofinsecurity but security source tothis, may human one within also paradigm the add 96 CEU eTD Collection series of seriesmost of criteria,such frequently the in issuesthatappear addressing debates on the a proposes of chapter the section last This scrutiny. under initiatives regional different the of characteristics institutional the assessing for criteria several needs analysis institutional of the institutional ofnationalThe framework security is intheprevious section in analysispresented used the dimension 3.3 Assessing institutional cohesivenessof regional cohesiveness, in chapter 7. Apart from cooperation with ofinitiatives. programsrespective andactivities the the this, the of the scope the thatdefine correlate the objectives to important isit scrutiny,under human resources. Therefore, when assessing the official documents of the organizations resources, though usually a societal area, may refer also to the development ofmilitary human of field the in cooperation Similarly, needs. cultural and economic both answers asit in hascomponent, ofboth an economic anda field societal cooperation tourism the instance, make.For to difficult sometimes are collaboration of governmental areas potential the of classifications such Nonetheless, disasters. ecologic of prevention the or norms issues management, and the may the harmonization environmental water address of of waste youth of human Finally,culture, environmental the education,and cooperation resources. areas the in arrangements cooperative the include also may one sector, this In anticorruption. in thefields of justice and home affairs, such as migration, fight against organized crime and may societal cooperation. In the one include agriculturesector, cooperation andcross-border telecommunications, technology, science, tourism, (FDI), investment direct foreign stimulation transport, infrastructure, of trade, common of tothe related the development may cooperation include sector economic The military capacities. of coordination to the or reform military the to refer may cooperation sector, military the In countries. participant dialogue thataimsestablishing at more the priorities for specific cooperation among the 97 CEU eTD Collection such transformations see, for instance, Schiavone (2001). Schiavone instance, for see, transformations such OAU. initiative pan-African of the creation the and process decolonization of the peak the (CARICOM).Around the same period,in Africa, severalsmaller regional arrangements emerged a decade after shortly lived CaribbeanOrganization the and in replaced its turn(CARIFTA) was soonreplaced Agreement with Trade the Free Caribbean Caribbean the Community Caribbean, the in Similarly, emergence. its collective security purposes forwhichit was created, simply disappeared inthe 1970s, only two decades after 44 arrangements in the ideological confrontation (Fawcett 2004, 2005). Inthe arrangements in confrontation (Fawcett2004,2005). post-Cold ideological the War respective the of importance largely the reflected classification War, this Coldthe states’ foreign policy goals and within the international system. In the particular context of these of viewpoint the from arrangements, regional respective the grantto member states the that the importance primarily indicates scale issueof the circumstances, historical these and Under Hurrell 1995). (Fawcett bipolar system collapseof the the after necessary more even became This more scale. efficient asmaller, theneedfor expressed frequently reforms system. bipolar the of even collapse before the simply phasedout or arrangements with other be reformed, replaced to needed initiatives largeregional these several of reason, influencetheir in andregionalworld increasinglypolitics (Fawcett 1995).Foreroded this such address intendedspecificshortcomings, they and, dueto were problems regional to that alwaysthe appropriately could not such answer arrangements Yet, its 1968). leverage(Nye increase chances to the higher the initiative bigger regional the the power, demonstrations of were actions international most in which context a In relations. international War Cold the of from particularities the partially derived in arrangements such The interest Unity (OAU). African of Organization (OAS) and the States of American Organization the (Comecon), Assistance forEconomic Mutual Council the WarsawPact, the (NATO), Organization Atlantic Treaty North the grand scale,as designed such at those level were regional initiatives at amount of mostvisible,largest well WorldWar,the as the Second as After the 3.3.1 What scale matters? These scale issuesarethe and institutional the design of organisations. the scholarship. organisation international and regionalism both within regionalism of nature For instance, the South-East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), an initiative that could no longer fulfil the 98 For an overview of overview an For 44 These CEU eTD Collection there are there for infrastructure, example, energy transport, may be thisFinally, label. andclassified under of fields in the mostly cooperation of enhancement the proposes that An arrangement area. areas, which may not be closely related to each other. to which may notbeclosely related areas, security. Second, there is there security. Second, one-dimension are there First, arrangements. of regional types three among may one distinguish respect, documents andin of official the texts the organisations related to its procedures. In this for isAn indicator this activities. variable number of the appearin as goals they founding the its of scope the to according beassessed can aninitiative of scale the least, Not universal. is considered regional; otherwise, it is considered simply multilateral and potentially declarations and actions of the participant countries. If such is the case, then the arrangement certain area, either explicitly in the founding documents or maximum standard towhether refers the membership is of an arrangementa limited to The countries. greater than three or members equal is of a number minimalstandard the Usually, regional. arrangement intergovernmental an considering for thresholds maximal and minimal the to is related question relevant the context, this In localism. to multilateralism Agreement, may be more restrained. From this perspective, regionalism may range from havenumber such members, theEuropeanFree of averylarge while others, as Trade scale is the number of participants. of the A Thereindicator second visibility. of in higher political frequently contexts it more appears are regional initiatives, suchbecause another, than important more beconsidered may as initiative aregional of participants, the OSCE, which number with a similar instance, For arrangements. respective tothe of references and context thisorder, is dimension grasp and moreto is difficult measured usually number the through extensive initiatives. These focus only on one sector of activity, for instance, military instance, for activity, of sector one on only focus These initiatives. regional arrangements. These are instances of cooperation in different in cooperation of instances are These arrangements. regional intensive regionalism.This in fields develops several larger of a 99 de facto through political through CEU eTD Collection and Second, they may be consultative, which means that such regional initiatives are just are initiatives regional such that means which consultative, be may they Second, states. member the from independently decisions apply and take to possibility the and power is that the have they they maybeoperational, First, categories. three into organizations organization has from its member states. In this sense, Archer(1992)classifies international independence tothe degreeof the according organizations may international classify distinction is particularly not foruseful analysis From purposes. a second perspective, one both with and memberthe states with third (Kratochwil parties Therefore, the 1989). in relation andrules norms certain set organizations even is operational that the approach programmeis whiletheWorld Bankanoperational organization, with thisone. Theproblem refer to these two logics as programme and operation, respectively. In their view, the UN is a implement norms Rittberger norms and may eitherandZangl(2006), or setrules. and rules intergovernmental respect, organizations normsin In rules. this and establishing of terms organization members relation between andthe should thepower one perspective, assess a first From major approaches. two are there scholarship organization international within member states, and the between the initiative powers of division it to When the comes among these three differentdifferentiate dominates therespectiveinitiatives. To orgroup of no significantactors actor situations, I propose mightinstance, of be there dominantactors. Finally, agroup is possibility the also there that to refer to them as Inother processes. decision-making the dominates actor one may where be there cases First, thearrangement. within actors dominantis of number the particularly significant respect, this In decision-making. of mechanisms efficient for allows states member the with relation particularlynot as longrelevant, structure within asthe of power organisation in the and is countries participant of number the arrangement an of cohesiveness institutional the For 3.3.2 Institutional design plural regionalism respectively. regionalism 100 hegemonic , clustered , CEU eTD Collection developed at non-governmental developednon-governmental level. at Within this type of several fields cooperation, specific are that andsometimes projects finance business environment allowthe of participation the several levels.cooperation at Theyinvolve many layers frequently political of the apparatus, dialogue as regionalism international of refer this category to I events. isolated cooperation (such asregional orcooperativeusually butorganisations frameworks) they are of moreprocesses enduring into transform can meetings these Sometimes, armed conflict. management suchas harder of under a regional to security the sectors, scrutiny are related issues the Often, initiatives. oriented politically mostly as qualify may they reason, this For level. regional forums at andpolitical diplomatic multilateral arerather These region. the other high-ranking political actors discuss, periodically or not, certain issues important for and/or and state government of heads where andconferences meetings arethe regionalism ofinternational variants The loosest organisations. andregional agreements trade free suchas structures institutionalised more to conferences regional and talks loose from can range also cooperation intergovernmental regional From perspective, an organisational interest. arrangements in which the members consult each other with respect to issues of common jointly by the member states. Finally, states. by jointly member the decided projects execution the specific of coordinate or execute that regional organizations andindependent values, of memberthe states.Second, e instancesto toset in the hasinitiative and the power regional the apply which ownnorms its similarly to Archer’s operational international organization, international operational toArcher’s similarly First, categories. three into be classified initiatives intergovernmental regional that propose decide. on this taxonomy, I Drawing states member whatthe executes organization only the namely executive, be may they Finally, states. member by the matter the on consulted . Apart from these, there are also forms of cooperation that require closer that forms of alsocooperation from are there these, . Apart 101 consultative regionalism refers to regional xecutive operational regionalism refers to the regionalism refers regionalism ad-hoc political CEU eTD Collection may be an indicator of administrative sustainability. For instance, the more institutionalized, For instance,themore sustainability. of indicator be may administrative an institutionalization Thesethey havesecretariat. degreesof various also aunique permanent explicitmust in institutional be that practiceand structure, an objectives through goals put phase of maya regional framework, also regionalgenerate from Apartorganizations. having directly throughtheintermediary or Political dialogue, are established. centres, coordinating various including and structure, institutionalized some forare adopted cooperation specific are more that may from whenguidelines conferences frameworks evolve such The regional fulfilled on a rotation basis by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of the participant countries. functions areusually secretariat The further cooperation. principlesset the for that reunions and similar level much the conferences of go further not does political dialogue adhoc the at the level headsof of states and governmentis present among all the three types. However, dialogue Political continuum. a on placed be also may of regionalism categories These three many variants of complexity, this should be seen rather as a continuum. the However,given structure. bureaucratic in of terms complexity their account intotaking between suchorganisations for instance. differentiate further One Council could Europe, of or less complex bodies with variouspermanently hosted by one of countries. participantthe Inaddition, they morealso develop procedures of decision-making. aheadquarters with secretariat havea regional general organisations in structure, This is the case of the decentralized frameworks, which Unlikeregional arerather namely regional organisations. cooperation as to may be referred of arrangements class entire This exchanges. commercial andto sector economic the to only limited this cooperation, of are aspecies atregional level arrangements free (RTAs)or trade agreements Regional trade arrangements. policy mostly as qualify may they view, of point this From identified. usually are interest of . Finally, there are also more institutionalized forms of regional cooperation, 102 regional frameworks of CEU eTD Collection financial sustainability refers to the financial sources and resources of the respective regional The terms. financial in also assessed be should sustainability administrative the Yet, Table 3.3Dimensions of institutional cohesiveness for international regionalism toregional may contribute cohesiveness. it more the andconsequently 1999) may be(Peters arrangement regional that stickier the

STRUCTURE OF OFANALYSIS DIMENSION SUSTAINABILITY SCOPE DECISION-MAKING resources and sources Financial institutionalization of Degree states member and the between the initiative powers of Division arrangement actors within the of dominantNumber Number of areas member states member The initiative is fully supported by the sectors security more or one on focus headquarters) and otherbodies, with permanent (with secretariat Organisation with permanent jointly by the members decided of projects execution the coordinates or executes initiative The No dominant actor activity of sectors different to belonging Many, and with focus on political security secretariat, permanent without level, Political dialogue at governmental income generating instruments generating income The initiative relies only on its own policy areas certain in ofcooperation structures and framework guidelines, the establish orOne a series of arrangements that interest ofcommonissues consultation among the members on The initiative is a channel for states member of the independent apply its own norms and values, setand to power the has initiative The actors of dominant Group One activity of sector one around clustered Several, One contribution of the members instruments but it relies mostly onthe The initiative has its ownfinancial INDICATOR 103 Fully supported Regional organisation Executive Plural Extensive Ad hoc political dialogue Self-sustained framework Cooperative Consultative Operational Cluster Hegemonic Intensive One-dimensional Partially supported TYPE OFREGIONAL TYPE COOPERATION CEU eTD Collection structure of decision-making and to the degree of administrative sustainability of the respective arrangement. respective the of sustainability ofadministrative degree to the and ofdecision-making structure withan intermittent line. This expresses the fact thatthe degree of institutionalization may referboth to the 45 be mighta grouping organization asaregional that institutionalized same time,is fact the the At relations. their more institutionalize to chose which countries, member the between links strong of existence the might suggest organization a regional of existence the instance, For factors. with correlated other ifnot situations opposing indicate could institutionalization of degree the Similarly, level of cohesiveness. least acertain a groupmaintains at that might beanindicator cooperation extensive continuous Instead, increase. security threats forif example, higher mightgenerate inhardsecurity when cohesiveness developed issues and might more cooperation cohesiveness. extensive produce One-dimensional cooperation, one-dimensional both circumstances, right the under Yet, friendship. political to substance participants. At the same time, extensive cooperation could be toodiluted to give a particular maintaining of links between political supportthe technical becomethe close to too possible casesmay opposingproduce Cooperation in hypotheses. only area mightone three the of each scope, theorganizations’ of in thecase instance, For straightforward. is proposition yielding no level theoretical at although cohesiveness, regional may alsohypothesizing help relation the institutional this withof design of degree the It international processes. of regionalism complex reality the for criteria providing ordering regionalism. European Eastern and Central forpage andinstitutional 8 areusedinchapter analysisthe of ColdWar dimension of post All ofinstitutionalelements these cohesiveness aresummarized in 3.3 Table on previousthe First, when categories. intothree may be initiatives classified view, of regional From point this initiative. they have their own budget they are partially supported income generating institutionsbut still rely on contributionthe of memberthe states they are One can notice that the distinction between sustainability and the structure of decision-making is marked is ofdecision-making structure the and sustainability between distinction the that notice can One . Finally, they can be can they Finally, . fully supportedfully 45 104 The usefulness of this grill resides mostly in mostly resides grill this of usefulness The self-sustained by members. . When they have some have they When . CEU eTD Collection and Eastern Europe. and Eastern background andpolitical contextin international which regionalism has developed in Central further developed in the third part of the thesis, after the second part establishes the historical are issues These agreement. cooperation intergovernmental regional a of cohesiveness establishedinstitutional design the more degreeinstitutional offers information about of the within of cooperation of practice the the analysis day the endof the cohesivenessat but initiatives. In short, institutional design may indicate or contribute to a certain degree of these around practices institutional aswell as the initiatives, regional of development and of creation circumstances the investigate to needs one case, isthe decide which To initiative. the creation of atthe discussions from technical emerging an incident just 105 CEU eTD Collection HISTORICAL LEGACIES, OF BACKROUNDS REGIONAL CANONS, PART 106 COHESIVENESS AND II PALIMPSESTS: POLITICAL CONTEXT CEU eTD Collection regionalism in ColdWar. the areaduring regionalism the international evolution the of present sections three last the alliances, while Interwar formed identifying the main of problems process.the Thenextsection is dedicated to the Europe Eastern and Central of nation-states the in which context political and historical the review I section, first the In development). social and economic political, common by generated (i.e.fear of rather than threat longdevelop will lastingframeworks of to instancesofnegative cooperation forerunners 1980s exception late are regionalism, these of Central and Eastern Europe before the end of the Cold War and shows that, partially with the in established cooperation intergovernmental of regional forms examine the I chapter, as the politicalexplore this background,identifying regionalthe institutional andlegacies, identity as well context in whichvacuum buton a particular historical,cultural and political background. I Inthis part, second this specific Inlineothers. appear in with constructivist not thinking, regional cohesiveness a does casefrom distinct remain regions certain how ofrepresenting to alternative regionalism constructivist a social has wasbuiltThis framework thearound concept of regional cohesiveness, which I designedas developed. In ofthis post Cold War Central frameworkwhich through case the conceptual presented anddiscussedthe The part previous and East European regionalism is analysed in this dissertation. IN P H C REHISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL REGIONALISM ISTORICAL ANAMNESIS ISTORICAL HAPTER C ENTRAL AND ENTRAL 4 E ASTERN : E UROPE 107 CEU eTD Collection political rights. Sometimes such differences reflected a situation that had existed before the had existed that a situation reflected suchdifferences Sometimes rights. political socio- and awareness, andcultural political assimilation, autonomy, of degrees different Christiansdenominations. of Asimperial different nationsthese subjects, were groups exceptions, ethnic these fewWith suchpeoples asnotable Vlachs. the semi-nomadic and nomadic of communities several as well as population, Jewish numerous the Gypsies,equallyArmenians, more but prominentmuchwere the ofthe region. dispersed groups Even throughout anscattered were onwards, century important twelfth the from area the into moved had who Germans, of communities addition, In behaviour. imperial strong increasingly number with a state of A Poles werea largePolish of rule the Prussia, numberof alsosignificant under population. Muslims, over most of the Ukrainians,usually Byelorussians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, as well as over ruled It character. multiethnic a similarly had Empire Russian The vocal. politically most of TurkishMontenegrins, Bulgarians, the and Albanians the werethemost numerous, aswell as the or Tatar the Serbs, the Romanians, the Greeks, the mosaic, itsethnic Within as diverse. origin,Serbs, Poles lands Rhutenians, and Italians.The of OttomanEmpireEuropean werejust the a Slovenes, Croats, by Hungarians, Romanians, Slovaks, covered territoriesinhabited Czechs, viewpoint Itsauthority of inforefront. ethnic diversity, Monarchy the Habsburg was the more of the three empires that competed for power in this part of the continent. From the cultural elites had developed a minimal concept of collective identity forthe respective group. are used interchangeablymonist measure that does not fit well the pluralism of identity building. In this chapter, nationand nationality identity puzzle is more tocomplex andcannot be exclusivelyrefer defined in terms of ethnic belonging, which isa to criterion, Kahn’s thatconcept excludes as the groups such orJewsthe Gypsies. (1984)argued, AsBanac the group oforganized intheir people, history at least oncea state in orquasi-state entity. Yet,while offering aneasily applicable usuallyproblem, Kahn(1983a) proposes concept the of“historiopoliticalentities,” referring to those groups that definedthat time becauseon not all of them had ethnicraised theircollective cultural identity at political level. Tosolvebasis, this 46 whose political or In the early 19 4.1 Thetimeofnational awakening The notion of nation may not be appropriate for all the groups that could be identified on ethnic grounds at grounds ethnic on be identified could that groups the all for be appropriate not may of nation notion The th century, all Central century, all Central into nationsandincorporated EastEuropean were one or 108 46 experienced CEU eTD Collection emancipation that took place during most of 19 of placemost the during took emancipation that commonly the accompanied processes national of formation identity and political theseterritories For of mistrust reasons, (Kann neighboursthe 1983a, 29-38). deep the of some over control imperial stable more a maintain to order in politically exploited were differences Empire, these within Austro-Hungarian later the and HabsburgEmpirethe Particularlyimperial by of than religious groups concessions the within power. considerable or ethnic neighbouring the of expenses onthe rather weregranted these that happened autonomy socio-politicalor rights had been obtained during the imperialit frequently rule, higher of have Even degrees did not when andsocial groups political that rights. certain relation to the imperial power but alsoin contrast with the neighbouring ethnic or religious For example, the political differentiation among different groups was not expressed only in hadsignificant weight. local a the context interactions, of political in configuration and, the suggest power imperial the of with than relation more patterns complex the however, were, The religious, and political ethnic relationships among different populations in region the Jelavich 1983a, 83-4). advantages levels within top the imperial of administration (Marmullaku 1975,15-9, 143). In samethe way,intheOttoman Empire, MuslimAlbanians enjoyed largepolitical mid-19and until especially relations Empire, of Habsburg the the religion of HabsburgHousehadthe frequently been privileged in politicalthe hierarchies as Catholicism Forexample, than others. hadmorepolitical advantages denominations (Kann Similarly, Ottoman state Jelavich 174-9). certain religious 1983a, 109-49, 1983a, This was particularly awareness. cultural and of political leasthigher degrees at or empire within the autonomy the case of Hungariansincorporationtheir in an empire usuallyenjoyed higher degrees of orcultural political in the Habsburg Empire before politicalhad structures instance, that consolidated ethnic imperial rule.groups For or of Greeks in the 109 th century. This was increasingly visible increasingly was This century. th century (Sked1989,47, century CEU eTD Collection establishing their own state in 1913, with the help of the great powers andseveral after powers in great help the of the state 1913, with own establishing their for further Theysucceededin prompted national among Albanians. awakening, especially it time, same the At reshuffle. territorial further for allowed power Ottoman the of decline and the principality created The Bulgaria (Jelavich1983a, 352-61). abruptof 193-213, Romania, andMontenegro, Serbia to gavefullindependence This Treaty (1878). Berlin of uprisings and an armed conflict between the Russian and the Ottoman forces, ended with the national local more after which, supervision, international into changed was protectorate the Russian Empire, which instituted the protectorate of these territories. After the Crimean War, inunrest the government early thedemandsaccepted the1800s and weakOttoman of the political of levels high experienced also been had Empire Ottoman the of provinces Serbian The Romanian and 1983a,214-29). Britain, EmpireRussia,Great and the Ottoman (Jelavich several diplomatic and military incidents related mainly to the Mediterranean politics of the a series of violent uprisingsachieve this goal.independence Their was through granted Treaty the of London (1830)after of the Greek population to first werethe Greeks The conflicts. after armed or through mainly and Empire Ottoman of the Peloponnesus, as Montenegrins,the from Albanians. theBulgarians independence and the Allhadgained the well as after Romanians, Serbs, theGreeks, Thesestates. andestablish the independent were power When in Warbegan, only FirstWorld imperial the from six nations succeeded seceding nations. cooperation hindered political among frequently different emerging the circumstances Despite the gradual decline of imperial the distrustthe powers, andprejudges, as well as nationalmidsince region. awareness movements the the 1800s,when spread throughout 110 CEU eTD Collection Russian influence almost adecade after Treatythe of Berlin (Jelavich1983a, 299). ofclient Austro-Hungarian the Empire 1878in and remained a so 1903,until while became Bulgaria Serbia was under1923, direct until Russia and France Britain, of Great protectorate the under remained Greece period. 48 Bulgaria was in, rapidly defeated (Hall joining 2000). Empire Ottoman the and Romania With war. Balkan second a generated and countries two these Greece Serbiaand withseveral important territorial acquisitions that she would have liked, Bulgaria attacked reasonsstrategic for insisted who, onpowers, the creation great ofof the an independent Albanian intervention the state. Unsatisfiedthrough stopped was with the results,advancement which Their had leftrule. Ottoman Ottoman Empire with the intentionof dividing among them Albania and Macedonia, territories still under 47 were thelargestminority inAustrian lands the of DualMonarchy,the sought toobtain a were still struggling forpolitical rights and more autonomy. TheCzechs, instance, for which All the same, these were significant highextraordinarily degree of 1991,13-14). autonomy (Williamson politicalthis typeself-governmentwas notequivalent of tofull an independence to butrather advancements, as mostamong all othernationsthe of multiethnicthe (Taylor state A.J.P.1990, 142). Nevertheless, nations in the regionforEmpire. Germans, the Hungariansinpolitical hadbecome the Except strongest terms mechanism power-sharing withinhad been created newlybrandedAustro-Hungarian the defencefinances Sked and A.J.P. 1990,146-8, 1989, 190-7).Inthis(Taylor a different way, Hungarian Kingdom beself-governedin everythingto foreign with exception the of affairs, ( in“compromise” obtainingsucceeded a Austria fordefeated in supremacyin German competition the world,the Hungarians after Prussia decadeslater, two forces werecrushed.Only span, before their revolutionary 1983a, 118-25).In Hungarian 1848, the butonlyelites achieved goal this forshort time a rights of Hungarianthe Kingdom, many of which had beenlost in latethe 18 constitutional the of restoration the wished Hungarians importantly, Most Hungary. and Empire. In the first half of the 19 To these, should one addthe particular ofHungarian case autonomy Habsburg the within two consecutive wars(Jelavich 1983b, 100-5). gave in its theOttoman one collapse,Balkan states last blowsbefore rulethe of inEurope From a certain From a viewpoint, neither independencethe of Balkanstatessome was truly complete during the In 1912, in what is known the first Balkan War, Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro and Serbia attacked the th century, there had been growing tensions between Austria between tensions growing been had there century, 111 Ausgleich 47 ) with Austria.) with Thisallowed the 48 th century century (Kann CEU eTD Collection 2000, 123-5). (1913), they were divided betweenSerbia, Greece Bulgaria and througha treaty inBucharestsigned (Hall 49 the Croats had their own version of the succeed Incontrast, not bureaucracyinGerman lands, they (Kann1983a,182-91). did their similar“compromise” Hungarians. asthe Less organized and than facing latter the alarge groups lived andBitola. Thessalonica groups inKosovo, large lived Romanian population inAlbanian Transylvania. Greek, and various Slavic Albania, for instance, a sizeable Albanian population was left out in Kosovo and Metohija. A the of creation After the nation-state. their wereoutside groups Largeethnic borders. of settledhadthey not question importantly, difficult the already the Most turmoil. widespread The emergenceof map states newthe independent the on addedmore of entropy Europe to provinces had become russified. least, by the end of the 19 Not 21). (Wandycz 1974, tsar the towards than Habsburgemperor the thePopeor towards rather hadhave allegiances would Uniates for fear that empire, in of the parts some dissolved detriment of Polish2005, 143-4). The Uniate (Polunov (GreekCatholic) church was also centralisation, the while Russian language was imposedin and educationcourts in the notable uprisings in thenational contextof awakening, theirfierce kingdom was subjectedto in enjoyedinstance, freedom some local half firstthe 19 the of for Poles, minorities. ethnic its of life socio-political the russify to attempted frequently entireautonomy. the 19 During in were andcultural worstpolitical off even of Empire,In terms groups Russian the ethnic formal these (KannWilliamsonrights 1983a, 233-59, 1991, 24). However, the policies of national homogenization within Hungarian the kingdom rendered them (Jelavichextensive rights self-government 1983a,65-6, Taylor A.J.P.1990, 149-50). Within the Ottoman state, these three were the so-called Macedonian vilayets. After the Second Balkan War Balkan Second the After vilayets. Macedonian so-called the were three these state, Ottoman the Within th century, the German-influenced educational system in the Baltic the in system educational German-influenced the century, th century, this state led a of politics high centralisation itand Ausgleich 112 (Nagodba), which should have granted have should which (Nagodba), 49 These ethnic configurations and the Theseethnicconfigurations and th century several after but, century CEU eTD Collection Bulgaria was deprived of some of the territory Bulgaria whilesome acquired, wasdeprived borders of previously of territory the Hungary’s Czechoslovakia. hand,Romania of greatly Kingdom wasalso The enlarged. On other the of newstate the creation of to the led andSlovaks Czechs between agreements century, independentcould Atthe Poland asan state. same re-emerge political the time, concludedbetween agreements 1919 and 1923.After havingbeen in dismantled 18 the various relations and peace theareaandin within borders through newpower Europe new new states, emergenceof This meantthe had disappeared. region, all empires three of an imagined. less in but resultsboth the purposes hadbeenhardly empire Instead the for be exploited to was opportunity This Empire. Ottoman the thecollapseof after continent powers, this was alsopolitical achieve as animportant goal national opportunity to the For theof European unity. a chance to establish all FirstWorld nationsthe theregion of within Warappeared to the outbreak In this context, a new system4.2 Unwanted alliances of security and stability on the neighbouring countries. conflicts with butlead to not could entities political “greater” of projects mixed, these national homogenization within the Hungarian Kingdom.in Yet, an area somuch ethnically of project the strengthened Hungarian rule under territories the of centralization increasing Austro-Hungarianpolitical collaborationSlovenes in the Balkans.Empire. andnotably most region, from Slavs the other of awareness The increasedethno-national Similar Croats, ideas wereMost Serbia. Greater Bulgaria or spread Greater Greece, also of Greater projects political the favoured rule among notably,contributed the nations Ottoman fragility the of political instance, the For limits.” in “natural of their visions states of the tothe the the fuelled more territories and couldthat acquired haveclaimed nation-states existence of emergencedecline of ofdifferent the Austrian plans of union power or and the 113 th CEU eTD Collection tensions most notably andwith Croats the Slovenes (Pavlowich 2003, 63-6). Kingdom of the SerbsYugoslavia, alsoacquired aleading role, which fuelled political its moreand minorityeven German compared to (Bo Slovaks position to compared hadadominant Czechs balancedCzechoslovakia, ethnically Worldand War(Crampton 1996, 113).Even in Crampton the more democratic and not Romanian, Similarly,in(Bogdan 1991, 263-5). 28%of population the expandedRomaniaalmost was compared SlovakCzechs or not were citizens the 33%of around inCzechoslovakia Polish, while to 8% before for non-dominant the thegroups. Forinstance, in Poland around 35%of populationthe not was territorialin andfreedoms of manyrights behaviourpolitical terms reproduced older empires’ the of acquisitions and wereempiresall enlarged inminiature states almost In fact, or emerged newly the minorities. sizeable gained broughthad states these of many territories, new the with time, same the by the FirstsAt armed weredealtthrough intervention. overVilnius, divergences the Lithuanian dispute Sometimes,like in the case of the Polish-Czechoslovak dispute over Teschen and the Polish- settlementby later meansbe by might whatever found appropriate involved. parties the for left frequently were details the and in terms weregeneral peaceagreements the fact that the dueto partially Thishappened disputes. territorial further particularly tensions, generated many arrangements these of climate, political the European of down Instead cooling province of Kosovo, inhabited by a numerouspopulation of Muslim Albanians. This included Muslima Slavand as also Bosnia-Herzegovina, territory, partly well as the andKingdom of laterbecome Croats Slovenes,Serbs, to theKingdom Yugoslaviaof (1929). form independentjoinedof to andMontenegro states already in1918the Serbia the Latvia, Lithuania andEstonia.Former the and subjectsof Dual Monarchy, Croats Slovenes independent the appeared also empire Russian the of ruins the From shrank. dramatically 114 Ğ ak 1991, Bogdan 1991, 318-25). Inthe ak 1991,Bogdan 1991, 318-25). CEU eTD Collection pact in Geneva, known as the Little Entente or the Pact of the Organisation, which legally which Organisation, the of Pact the or Entente Little the as known Geneva, in pact signeddefendto participantthisagainststates policy.In 1933,the country’srevisionist a as well as in Hungary, dynasty Habsburg the of restoration the prevent to was arrangement of this byFrance, purpose the Supported between 1920and1922. concluded agreements ofbilateral a series Yugoslavia through and Romania between establishedCzechoslovakia, was suchalliance The first fearof war. and/or considerations bystrategic motivated For these reasons, a seriesmore palpable governments forthe of newlythe independent enlarged or states. of alliances even threats made these support, external political increasingly and popular enjoying were emerged in the Interwarwhich Communism, FascismNazism, and ideologically to akin were that organized groups period. All of them were and Greece(Fischer-Gala more butitlimitedIn had Albania Italy directly comparison, a affected Yugoslavia, program Hitler, Germany’s political and territorial ambitions in the area nolonger had limits (ibid, 6). of with butPoland exclusivelyagainst advent the revisionist its pressure almost directed bilateral through intergovernmental oraggressive The Weimararrangements trade. Republic the entire region economicinfluence hadspread throughout exceptforRussia. in Its Europe, left country Germany Thepeacelargest the late settlement 5-8). (ibid., awarerather became subjectimportant governments European morewhich theCentral of and of concern, East 1992, 5).However, before SecondWorld the War, Germany had to proved been a much menace (Rotschild three of the biggest the USSRwereconsidered the of political ambitions and inthe 1930s, increasingly alsoideological their propaganda. Theideological and countries three these of ambitions the territorial feared particularly states European and East aggressive politics of Union, Soviet the and Germany Italy. of The governments Central the countries the in increasingly neighbours, faced of threat region the the revisionist Beyond new states. of the enhancedthefrailty environment least, theunstableexternal Not Ġ i The developmentin 1992, 6-8). most of regionthe politically of 115 CEU eTD Collection exchanges among the three countries were never boosted through the arrangement. the through boosted never were countries three the among exchanges economic the Yet, members. ofthe interests economic the tocoordinate means a as Council Economic interesting feature was that, beyond apolitical body (Permanent Council) and asecretariat, the alliance set an 50 issues. in security related foreign totheir particularly inmatters policy, bounded them collaborate.to More specifically, the parties should have consulted each other three Balticthree declaredneutral, countries hoping themselves they from far that will stay the the in Europe, broke conflict armed the when reason, For this 93). war (Anderson1988, mutual consultation and without any military clauses,it could not have been an instrument of confined late. to Furthermore, too however, came, This Baltic Entente signed an agreement. 1934, when Germandangerthe had become evident,Estonia, and Latvia Lithuania finally 1975).In armed (Rodgers forces useof period, the someinvolving the disputes throughout hadterritorial several who Lithuania, and betweenPoland relation tensioned highly the hadbeen foran such endeavour important obstacle most The alliances. of asystem creating of attempts been severalfailed therehad period Interwar the area,during In theBaltic alliances would not last for long. increasingly ita system sign Soviet refused that clear was such of agreement, Union the to between Greecearrangements and in theTurkey. aftermath Peace from the resulted asthey borders their mutually recognise to agreed signatories of the FirstHowever, World whose cooperation of atreaty Entente, Balkan the War. established Turkey and Yugoslavia This afterhelped normalize Albania, in further 10). Thesametension region 1992,Romania,the year,(Rothschild Greece, the relations Bulgaria,cooperation among them. this Soon, new alliance sided with Nazi Germany, whichgenerated Hungary, economic political for and greater an agreement Protocols, Rome signed so-called the ItalyGermany and Italy (Hanák 1992,180).Accordingly,Austria,in 1934, Hungary and Italy and with collaboration the to receptive more be to Hungary forced Entente Little the region, the in in of instead security increasingly stability climate tensioned long-term terms, providing the Onthe occasion, the Little Entente also designed a more developed institutional framework. Its most 116 50 In political and CEU eTD Collection one (Bán 1997, 1-35). Europe could have comprised of largethree federative structures - a Balkan, a Danubian and aPolish-Baltic discussed inrelationto the regionbut none materialized. According to most ofthese, Central and Eastern 51 equivalent to almost 30%of nationalthe (Berend and Ránki1974, 340-2).Humanassets effort. Their resources had been systematically plundered and material losses were war the after exhausted economically and countries socially Most were states. European East Central and inall levels atall hadthe deep traces left war the of decades. Thetraumas World Second War wasastensioned the after The political asduring previous climate the 4.3 Unstable times, improbable projects ceased exist to (Lopandi offederationmonetary such longerunion.and1943, By no context the projects suited aBalkan on also aconvention have prepared should Balkan Union staff.common The a and body military a body, financial economic an Affairs, Foreign of Ministers the by institutional The structure. potential federations should have had apolitical body coordinated Great Britain. suggestion the of atthe countries inexileof these by governments concluded the integration Openbetween for other a BalkanPolandcountries Union between andby the political andYugoslavia security necessities of the war times. Particular casesas were the projects of Czechoslovakiawell, and GreeceDuring the SecondWorld in alliancesWar, the developed region the were exclusively driven andthese that of a Centralproposals Europeanand theirincorporation in Sovietthe Union (O’Connor 2003,110-6, Anderson 1974). Alliance(Bán envisaged 1997, led loss andmilitary thistothe strategy independenceoccupation, republics three of the of 8-9). a rigged elections Through forced treaties.” tosign “mutual Poland, wereassistance all three complex TheseAfter USSRoccupiedeastern the 1993). with (Crow Germany treaties sign non-aggression were draftsturmoil 2003,108).Despite(O’Connor such measures, Estonia andLatvia were forced to of regional During the early 1940s, within the European diplomatic circles several other (con)federative projects were projects (con)federative other several circles diplomatic European the within 1940s, early the During ü 2001,48-50). 51 117 CEU eTD Collection in the first decade of communist regimes, in each of these countries (with the exception of exception (with the in countries of these regimes, each decade of communist in thefirst and trials show had been experimented inmost of regionthe fact,(Skilling 1966, 72,93).In leaders party the of personality of cult the plans, five economic year processes, agricultural second halfof nationalizationof 1960s, the the property,land collectivization of and 36-8). Internally, reproducedmost newcommunist of the Sovietthe states policies. Bythe by greatly counterpart towhom (Skillingtheirsupported they were obedient 1966, Soviet had been communist across all region the parties efforts, their other power the through own With notablethe of exceptions AlbaniaYugoslavia and acquired wherecommunists political in lessyearsmostly communist from than endofthethree war,riggedthe elections. through became states European Union,and East Central from Soviet the the heavy pressure under and externally Unsupported extinction. of verge the on were democracy of elements few remaining The unstable. highly were regimes European East and Central the Politically, Poles had been expelled from Sovietthe Union by 1948(Bogdan 1991, 391). not the only ones affected by such practices. Most notably (in terms of quantity), two million Germans and the other minorities that had been on the losers’ side at the end of the war were from more halfwhich PrussiaPoland, of from than 1998, 13).But (Fiztmaurice East forcedinto labour (Pykel AlmostApor2004; 2004). million four Germans wereexpelled million Germans, as well as several hundred thousands Hungarians,many of whom were put more two of than country an the deporting cleansing Czechoslovakiaethnic initiated 1945, in instance, For by retaliation. also affected were Germany war the during alliedbeen to had region (Prauser and Rees2004).Minoritiesethnic belonging whose to nation-states groups fledthe or weredeported of Germans number a sizeable regime. Consequently, Nazi the with having collaborated inbloc of wereaccused German community, who particularly the targeted These entire region. the place across took actions retaliatory reconciliation, million people mountedtoover 1991,390).Instead of 12 losses region the (Bogdan across 118 CEU eTD Collection communism and the creation of a Balkan federation, beyond national or ethnic affiliation ethnic national or beyond federation, of creation andthe a Balkan communism militated for openly part another Kingdom, the authority of of instead the under remaining Bulgaria Macedoniaunion. that IMRO proposed should beannexed While apartof to Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) made resurface the plans of a Balkan wide called Internal Macedonian group the period, anultranationalist Interwar During the Yugoslavia, which emerged politically in 1918as Kingdom andof Serbs, Croats Slovenes. werenot included Bulgarians various political in reasons, of final the political project whom Albanians. Yet, the Yugoslav concept of nation-state did not diminish its strong ethnic dimension. 52 inidea the 19 hademerged (con)federation. The a Balkan of wasthe these creation plans ambitious themost of One of The Balkan4.3.1 (con)federation help getmemberwere newalliances intended to out sphere. the of Soviet states the Others context. new political inthe revived projects older were them of Some influence. from further Soviet the slightly which were in particularly theBalkans, manifested These regional intergovernmental cooperation developed immediately after the Second World War. dominated by Sovietthe both in Union internal and externalaffairs, several of projects increasingly was politics states’ European East and Central the fact that the Despite cooperation and mutual aid signed limited with USSR the much of foreign their policy. (Schöpflinstructure forced 77). Externally,control within treatiesof state 1993, the of influential weresoadvisors they hadYugoslavia) Sovietstructures parallel that developed the Croats, the Serbs and the Bulgarians (Trgov Bulgarians andthe Croats, the Serbs the Slovenes, the namely Slavs, Southern Christian the united have would federation, a probably federation most a andidea.independentwas appealing a state, Such mobilising politically in an Slavs Southern of Austro-Hungarianempires,the the gathering andOttoman Southern Slavs might create. At that time, within the context of national emancipation within Instead, through territorial acquisitions, Yugoslavia incorporated asizeable number of Muslims, many of th century in the debates concerning the nature of state that of state thenature concerning in debates the century 119 þ evi ü 2003, 230, Velikonja For 2003,84). 2003,230, 52 CEU eTD Collection meant a stronger communist presence in the Balkans, and consequently closed to the to closed consequently and Balkans, the in presence communist a stronger meant have would newstate Britain, the Great For USSR. the and Britain Great the by particularly excluded them (Jovi that national unity of concept a on built state of a be part to alienated felt Yugoslavia The Albanian Albanians tensions with of inKosovo. population federation generated Balkan Yugoslavia eveninanenlarged of abandon hesitation ethnic concept the to Tito’s n16).(Marmullaku factthat by also was complicated 2003,situation The the Macedonia partition aswell of as the Yugoslavia, and between parity Bulgaria wanted however, The government, Bulgarian state. newfederal the creation of the same asbefore the have would remained these between provinces borders andMacedonia. The Montenegro Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Bulgaria, federal hadstate units: seven hadparts two opposingviews. The wouldliked Yugoslav have newgovernment thatthe Despite2003, 163). thefact in that signed1948 they ineven an agreement sense,this the governments discussed thepossibility unitingtheirof (Jovi inafederal territories state between and Yugoslav 1944and Bulgarian 1948,the notably,made period.the Most during several Albania andGreecehadbeen atcollaboratingBulgaria, 1950s.Yet, with the attempts likely wasnot in Romania Stalinist increasingly the with apartnership circumstances, these USSR influence and become an playerimportantin area the (Lopandi from the distancemeans Yugoslavia to asa federation resurrect ideaof the a Balkan to preferredRomania included andTito Yugoslavia, Albania,arrangement toGreece, Bulgaria, leaderYugoslav Although Tito. JosipBroz Comintern the have likedthatthe would with newthe impetus project gained a communist War, the World After Second the federation (Cviic 1991,14-5,Marmullaku 2003,312). been aBalkan should idea replacedwith the thatYugoslavia have strongly supported (Djordjevic Held Within 1992,320-1, 1994,21). same theCominternperiod, the also ü 2003, 163-4). The arrangement was also opposed externally, The arrangementwas also 2003,163-4). opposed 120 ü 2001,50).Under ü CEU eTD Collection (Marmullaku 2003,312-3). YugoslaviaAlbania,hadunitedif Albania oraBalkan (con)federation joined to ever two secret articles. signed on that occasion Agreement an of ThisFriendship andCooperation, whichhad an annex of annex was an agreement that the Kosovo and Metohija would be attempted to find the secret inTito’s annex archives butwithout any success. document was The not found off the diplomatic relations with the USSR, the Central Committee of the League of Communists of Tito’sYugoslavia as served who Djerdja, and Josip Albania, Hoxha’s in ambassador Yugoslav first the from annex secret translator this of existence during the visit of the 54 Albanian leader to political cooperationBelgrade. (O’Donnell 1999, 20). In 1960,afterinterdependence betweenAlbania and Yugoslavia second inthe halfofAlbania 1940s the might promptedhave further broke 53 Jovi between thecountriesmighttwo have beenasuggestion of (O’Donnell,Stalin 1999,23, The ideaAlbania that became a2003,312). of a federation (Marmullaku Yugoslav republic discussedleader,Tito thepossibility Albanian the communist Yugoslavia Hoxha, of Enver to visit official first the during Apparently, Slavs. Southern the to necessarily limited not Although highly dominated bythe Tito’s ethnic dimension, view of a Balkan federation was 2003, 162-3). such couldthrough Tito have projects in been a potential rival socialist (Jovi the camp from internationalistleast, Stalin the principles. Not 1948agreementbecausethe opposed of state wasadeviation Southern Slavs ethnicof federal strong envisaged dimension the the importantly, Most USSR. the in circumspection much with regarded was Slavs Southern the of leadership and unification the be to seemed ambition Tito’s that fact the region, andin in strengthen the of Europe communists power to the was perceivedasameans states Whilesuch attitude. afederation communist hadof Union Soviet amore ambiguous in The region. from the Britain backinga development such Great distanced also Bulgaria of incorporation the after have to planned was identity Yugoslav new the that dimension revolutionary The interests. andeconomic political ithad strong where Mediterranean, A former official of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, Ramadan Marmullaku found about the about found Marmullaku Ramadan of Yugoslavia, ofCommunists League of the official former A economic increasing the two, the between rapprochement the suggested not had Stalin if Even ü 2003, 163) but Tito andfor Hoxhausedit their 2003,163)butTito own purposes. 54 Shortly after, however, the relation between the two countries two the between relation the however, after, Shortly 121 53 The two governments two The ü CEU eTD Collection were encouraged to register as Turks emigrateand toTurkey (Marmullaku 2003,313-4). citizens during and the1950s,when Yugoslavthe government feared through a SovietAlbania, attack many predominantly Albanians from peasant Kosovo.However, Yugoslav were Albanians considered second-hand the Soviet type policies within Yugoslavia, including the collectivisation in agriculture, which discontentedYugoslav Albanians. the They Tito’ssupported attitude towards USSR,the mightbecause partly have this stopped 55 relationbetween Albania and Yugoslavia(Marmullaku 2003, 312-3, n15-16). either in Tirana, most probably a became Pact the arrangement, this Through parties. among the because cooperation military both Tito and however,Hoxha signing the of in Bledthe August 1954,which Treaty established formalized destroyed them andeducationculture (Lopandi after the deterioration to dedicated one and economic, military, four political, sections: also had organization, of the was status international whose of which wasbody. secretariat, The Bureau, atechnical andaPermanent body, apolitical which was from a Committee, Thisconsisted Secretariat. a permanent set Ankara Treaty the to agreement asupplementary later, yearHalf a culture. establishment of a framework for cooperation in spheres of economy, technology and of common interest. Among these, the treatycooperation. Open to other parties,mainly it thebasis provided for consultation issues on all expressly mentioned common defencewas signed inAnkara (February and form tookthe a treaty friendship1953) of on and and the agreement first The cooperation. of institutions several and four treaties yielded Balkan Pact mainly a defensive alliance. Although itforexisted only years (1953-1955), two Secondthe longer newwas likepredecessor, the but, projectits notime Interwar Romania participated of Romania, This Turkey and Yugoslavia. Pact (Entente) 1934 betweenGreece, Agreement the Balkan namely in Balkans, the idea cooperation of revived it an also older latter, the Like place of framework take not a Balkanfederation. mid-1950s, and conceptual within did the inlater, the with Greece emerged cooperation intergovernmental of project The regional 4.3.2 TheSecond Balkan Pact Moscow. Accordingly, the arrangement on Kosovo and Metohija was nolonger possible. Belgradeand between asAlbania sidedwith USSRfollowingthe aspiltdeteriorated, Aside effect of evolutionthis in the Albanian-Yugoslav relationwas the aggravation of the situationof the ü 2001, 52-4). The Pact’s Thedevelopmentimportantmost Pact’s was, 52-4). 2001, 122 55 CEU eTD Collection and was exercised especially through the Comintern (The Third International), an International), Third (The Comintern the through especially exercised was and Before the SecondWorld War,thisinfluence was limited communist mainly to the parties By the mid of the century, the entire Central and Eastern Europe was4. 4The Soviet-ledunder regional arrangements communist rule. influence. wereleftsphere of to the Soviet states communist the onwards this moment attractive theformerHeldIn security to 2001,51-53, allies (Lopandic from 1994,73). terms, longer no was Pact Balkan the reason, this For USSR. the with especially bloc, communist their quarrel over Cyprus.At the same time, Yugoslavia had normalized its relations with the in deteriorated seriously GreeceandTurkey year between relations the becausethat mostly treaty, this signing of the shortly after becameobsolete, entire organization reality. The became thisnevera body Yet, system. vote werebased on a majority making procedures decision- andits countries participantthe from eachof haveshould had20representatives examine possibilitiesfurther for the between cooperation signingthe Assembly The parties. newlyconsultative of institution parliamentary The purpose assembly.designed the was to of a in Ankara, purpose the signedestablishing of 1955 with inMarch was organization the membersgovernment thatshould havetaken twiceplace ayear The final (ibid.). agreement other and affairs foreign of ministers of reunion was which Council, a Permanent a atleast made Yugoslavia treaty members, Since Greece andNATO this both Turkey were UNCharter. of provisions the tothe in accordance longwere they as country, as attacked assist the to employed been have all means could occurred, If such a case entirethe on alliance. attack be an considered to was parties the signing oneof towards attack military a Accordingly, NATO. established importantly, the 5 includedit similar to aclause political and militarypolitical alliance of20years and for aperiod (Lopandi de facto NATO partner. The new agreement also instituted also newagreement The NATO partner. 123 th article of the North Atlantic Treaty that Treaty Atlantic North the of article ü 2001, 53-4). Most 2001,53-4). CEU eTD Collection disappearance (Claudin 1975). various factors, itseems that awaragreement betweenChurchill and Stalincontributed mostly to its 56 until of dissolution the organizationthe in1997, 550). 1943 (Broué In reality,Union. Soviet however, the of Party Communist the from independent was itComintern the wasOfficially, a section of that Party’s throughout worldthe andinstituting aninternational republic 1997,85-7). Soviet (Broué Central Committee andinorganization createdinMoscow of overthrowing purpose the 1919 with bourgeoisie it remained so June 1947. Shortly be Germany after, included to was tipped inthe financial program, while in was made Itsannouncement public states. Union Sovietthe newly and the communist initially allittargeted European the countries hadthat been affected by including war, the and Marshall so-calledThis wasthe Bideleux Plan 1998, 534). 1996, 334,Jeffries and 1% (Berend its reconstruction about of economic for annualGNPasfinancial assistance fiveyears offered for almost States United help the recovery, totheir order countries. In inof European mostthe wasdisastrous economic situation the War, World Second After the Comecon4.4.1 beyond the ideological dimension and entered into the economic and security realms. spread hadalready control region the of by mid-1950s theSoviet However, disappeared. Cominform the Yugoslavia, and USSR the between relation the of normalization foreign policy.survive This tool notdid much Stalin’s In1956,withregime. the the governments of gained theregion, throughout power thisthethat SovietUnion meant hadinfluence atool to the Central and Eastsupported communist Soviet96). Inpractice, direction the (Berend 1996,35, after parties European states, Soviet under parties communist ofthe actions the coordinate to was organization new of the especially with Informationthe Bureau of Communistthe andWorkers’ Parties (Cominform).The respect purpose to their othercommunistthe institutionally parties was in 1947through creationre-establishedthe of The The circumstances underwhich this organizationwas dissolved arestill subject of debate. Yet, among the 124 56 The Soviet control over CEU eTD Collection development of heavy the industry but largely neglecting trade (Skilling 1966, 216,Spulber1957, 358-63). 58 1992, 12, Bideleux and Jeffries 1998, 535). the region would have been rather within the Western sphere of influence than in the Soviet one (Fischer-Gala one Soviet the in than ofinfluence sphere Western the within rather been have would region the benefit from the Marshallto Program. allowed been This had would haveCzechoslovakia and triggered if Poland the participationcontrol Soviet the of escaped otherstates have might and they soonas after decades, 57 trade. through tomaximizeintegration or a genuineinto market countries participant the integrating for never searched Stalin negative. mostly Comecon were promoted USSR for which the machinery, (Bideleuxequipmentand other products Jeffries 1998,535).Yet,theand reasons foodstuff, raw materials, to aswell with respect as matters, in technical another to one assistance tooffer supposed were countries Theparticipant field. in theeconomic experience According the founding to theorganization documents, haveshould the exchange fostered of From verybeginning,the had Soviet the notonly Union butalsoa leading acontrolling role. Republic in followed 1950 (Spulber1957). Yugoslavia declined its participation. Albania amonth joined later. The German Democratic establishment of a Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA or Comecon). cooperation made the At endof the month, the public six governments among them. for closer economic discuss framework in the to Union Soviet the initiativeof order at the in of Poland Hungary, Czechoslovakia, andrepresentatives Romania metBulgaria, Moscow January the beginning1949, of atthe Accordingly, for economicstrategies recovery. However, the Central and East European states, as well as the Soviet Union seriously needed andcreated Marshall Aidthe (Skilling 216). wasforcibly rejected 1966, was Cominform settle the Onthe tooccasion, parties inorder question. the communist callgovernmentto aconference 2006,293,351).Thisof the the Soviet (Turnock prompted aid such in receiving interest manifested Poland, and Hungary Czechoslovakia, namely the Central and East European governments that were not fully under communism control, Like the USSR, the new communist regimes opted for rather autarkic economic strategies based on the based strategies economic autarkic rather for opted regimes communist new the USSR, the Like This was probably the decisive moment for the fate of the Central and East European states in the next four 58 Instead, the organization should have only provided a protected environment shouldhave only aprotected theorganization Instead, provided 125 57 Ġ i CEU eTD Collection and therefore the USSR leverage in this respect was not significant at that time (Spulber 1957, 431). 1957, (Spulber time that at significant not was respect this in USSRleverage the therefore and framework until late 1950s, whichdiminished the role of the organization. Not least, planning was still national (Turnock296). 2006, At same time, the the communist states continued tocollaborate outside theComecon Initially, led this to high economic growth, which further strengthened the faith inthis type of approach steadily products quality decreased andthe and Eastern competition, Central the the of gavelegitimacy SovietUnion 2006, However,fearing tothe (Turnock 296). without and risk and firstphase,countries thecommunist In a and this economically stabilized competition. (Robson 1987,224-6).This againstand relations system economic of risk protected trade in Only earlier, fifteen years states. the 1938, trade with each otherwasless than 13% for of of almost member 80% accounted the foreign the trade intra-Comecon trade By 1953, economic relations within the framework of the Soviet-led organization developed rapidly. drew the Central and East European states to each other. Isolated from the other markets, the strategies development as similar aswell beliefs, andideology thecommon political least, was trade notled initiative byprivate butwasa state monopoly Not(Brada 1988,654-5). socialistintegration and solidarity, because, particularly within the planned economysystem, of notion the was against requirement This partners. of trade treatment discriminatory on non- insisted the (GATT) andTariffs on Trade Agreement General established countries (Skilling In 1966, 216-7). addition, system the putforwardof bynewly trade the result of the economic sanctionsMost importantly, they hadimposed lost the Western economic partnersupon and markets. Thisthe was partly communist economically. with eachother forced tocollaborate were states communist the cooperation, regimes by the Western Despite the obvious imbalance and security the implications of designedthe mechanisms of Europe” (Bideleux Eastern and 1998,536). Jeffries of domination Soviet covernakedness of the with to which than as little more a figleaf West powers other (Wallace For andit Clarke1986,1-3). this “was reasons, indismissed often the Comecon was rather a meanswithin which maximizeto power, stability and economic growth of the tosocialist states. Thus, keep the satellite countries out of the economic reach of 126 CEU eTD Collection adopt them. adopt planning offices, the main purpose of this body was to draft agreements for joint projects and national of heads the the Gathering members. Comecon the of plans economic national implementation. for TheCouncilCommittee Cooperation in the Planning coordinated Its mainelaborateMoscow. was policy to purpose recommendations their andsupervise usually deputy chairmen the of ofMinisters Councils andthe was commonly heldin was membermeeting from Committee Executive each a regular of country, representatives Planning were in for Cooperation Committee Council andthe Committee Executive the institutions, other also centralleaders, formally which includedinwas not institutional hierarchy. theComecon Among the to the and of Heads the Government. Thisof wassystem aregularmeeting party of and government of power Parties Workers’ and Communist Secretaries of First of Conference was the of Comecon the relations organ important most the in practice, bodies. Nevertheless, subordinate and other Secretariat and decision-making.examined the of delegations from each member headed country, usually by prime This ministers. problems The meeting a Assistance, for Mutual Economic Council the wastheSession of organ Comecon of socialist constituted mainthe institutional framework organization.the of Officially, highest the bodies associated economicseveral and commissions standing twenty-four committees, council integrationfour Council,of the Secretariat of Council, the the Committee Executive the Assistance, Economic Mutual for Council the of Session The andinstitutions. clear more established which set the strategiespurpose, the member states economiesfro of the participantadopted countries and the trade relations among them. Partially with thisthe in 1959 a Charter with Confronted such problems, Comeconrequired the tools better for organizing the modelled after the Treaty of Europe. Central and Eastern Rome, was marketSovietinvaded bylarger normal supplies than oflow produced in quality goods 127 CEU eTD Collection Labour (1961). The objective of this program was to stimulate the specialization of each of of stimulate specialization the was to (1961). Theobjectiveprogram this of Labour Principles 1960s with of International of the Socialist Division approval the Basic the of in early the initiated hadbeen area economic an creating efficient attemptat An important terms. in economic inefficient organization the freedom somebutrendered degreeof had ensured This Comecon supranational authority. nor the consequence neither546). The Soviet the Union mechanism wasthat this of interdependence wouldfurther reducetheir political sovereignty (Bideleux and Jeffries 1998, was frequently invoked bythe Central andfor EastEuropean states fear that economic principle the so, Even abstain. only could they project, Comecon a in participate to wish not did if states practice, In interest. national their be against seemed to that vetothose and even according which were to member able states from toopt-out projectsthe like they notdid (Kaser 1967, 109-12). In 1967, this was supplemented with supplemented with the In 1967,thiswas 109-12). (Kaser 1967, of the organization, regardless of its economic size or its contribution to Comecon’s budget in organs vote all one and equal to representation right had the each country that this meant Another principle was that of 542-3). 1998, andJeffries toshare(Bideleux longerno disposed thatwas several keyfields todevelop until USSRstarted more in of technologies expensive 1960swhenthe the end the lasted sodobut practice the to willing eagerly not Germany were East and Czechoslovakia USSRneededthe a new infusion of technology 1967,78-81). The (Kaser more developed particularly war, after the was that of fortype cooperation this reason The documentation. of technical providing usually only costs the atachargecovered that states Comecon other the to technology transfer to required were it, member countries to According founded. was theComecon in yearin which same adopted the principle, Sofia was theso-called important among the Comecon partners. In To this added several a guidelineforprinciples relations framework, institutional the as the first two decades of the organization, one of the most sovereign equality 128 . Under provisions the of 1959Charter,the interested party principle interested party , CEU eTD Collection 1996, 130). (Berend space Comecon ofthe areas agricultural main the of one been have would this Europe, In Ukraine. proposalestablishing for a Danubian regionfrom about ofRomania, 30%of large Bulgaria of and 40% parts 59 independenceof and 1998,560). (Bideleux Jeffries adeclaration was considered that in vocal action an way, so a very did country, agricultural an become have should Principles Basic the to according which latter, the Especially plan. Hungary, the authority Poland andRomania opposed Czechoslovakia, (Kaser 1967,113-27). it practical would terms, have beginning of meantthe Sovietunder supranationalism In Union. Soviet the on mostly but other each on dependent highly countries communist Thismade on onindustry,agriculture. strategy have the would whileconcentrate others were required Consequently,states to of only some produced certain goods. categories have each should member words, Comecon In fields. inother member countries certain the environment hampered the recovery. For instance, the economic recession that the Western the that economic recession instance, the For recovery. hampered the environment economic international the Furthermore, difficult. increasingly also became exports Asaccumulated, more debt 243-5). Lavigne1991, 1986,147-9, states (WallaceandClarke many In 315). werenot addition, for beneficial contracts the communistnecessarily of Money wasted. badlyfrequently spent, luxurieswas foron 2006, party the elites (Turnock and Clarke1986).However, theinflow ofWestern technology andfrequently capital was Europein in 1960s,aswell Eastern the détente as bythepolitical 1970s (Wallace early the that had started in the by countries prompted internal of within process de-Stalinization communist the reform the Soviet Union and latersomemove to world. possible The Comecon tothe due was andmarketing, the area opened spread throughout need for Westernproducts,technology,financial and much newersupport, systems of management of the Central In option. wasanatural trade West-East the andof expansion the circumstances, Under such wereabandoned. BasicPrinciples the eventually within Comecon was that resultof the sharpening inthebackground, this discontent More specifically, the Romanian government condemned in April 1964 the so-called “Valev plan”, a plan”, “Valev so-called the 1964 April in condemned government Romanian the specifically, More 129 59 With the Soviet-Chinese controversies Soviet-Chinese With the CEU eTD Collection prompted by prompted transformationsthe of Europeanthe notably,security Mostenvironment. was establishment Its Romania. and Poland Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Albania, The founding agreementwassigned inWarsawand brought together Soviet the Union, In 1955, the communist 4.4.2 The Warsaw Pact bloc established a militaryand1994). Development security complement rose from Common inMarket 25% 50% in 1989 to Bank1992 (European for Reconstruction to the Comecon. time, the trade among the Comecon partners had fell to less than 7%, while trade with the reflect the degree to which the former communist partners maintained economic relations among them. among relations economic maintained partners communist former the which to degree the reflect though itofficially withdrew from organization only in the late 1980s. Despite such distortion, the figures partnersince 1964, neitheronAlbania, stopped which participated to Comeconafterthe 1961 Sino-Soviet split 1978 1962, 1972and respectively. Yugoslavia,onhowever,not include, do data They associate whichwas an 62 61 1986). 60 liquidateCouncil decided to the organization (Bideleux and 1998,582). Jeffries monthsinreform followed inbutBudapest, Comecon the Comecon nextthe the 1991, at to efforts it. Feeble put anendto not did others if the secede to threatened Czechoslovakia In 1990, hadbecome obsolete. By results. organization decade,the endof the significant the evenlookand more communisthave westwards,thesestates did other eagertonot the system within Comecon. Yet, with the Soviet Union increasingly open to the Western world inFor this mid-1980s todesign reason, therehavebeen planningattempts several a better (Berend Bideleux 1996,222-54, and 1998,563-9). Jeffries inlivingstandards and reductions drastic contractions faced sever economic and Romania Particularly Poland economic most recessions. acute experienced of 1983 countries these Central the European satellitesand (Lavigne East 244). As 1991, a result, between and 1979 offer could to Union Sovietthe helpthat limited economic the also USSR Stagnation within Europe. to Western exports made significantly time reduced atthat experienced countries The figures include data referring also to Mongolia, Cuba and Vietnam, which had become members in members become had which Vietnam, and Cuba Mongolia, to also referring data include figures The Since the organization never had legal personality, the liquidationwas mainly a political act. Traditionally,within the communist bloc, exports were also outfavoured by domestic supply (Csikós-Nagy 62 130 61 Atthat 60 CEU eTD Collection the Alliance since the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty (Kaplan 2001, 196-7). 2001, (Kaplan Treaty Atlantic North of the signing the since Alliance the 63 NATO. Western Union In European early (WEU). May became1955, Germany amember of inAtlantic 1955the (NATO) and in Treaty Organization creatingpurposes 1949the North regrouped for and military countries States United security the several Western European as highlyits to sensitive own Hungarian Romanianquestion,was cooperative the part on the communist countries and sharing with Soviet the Union as almost athird borders, its well of November free 1956the passageof exclusively Sovietarmedthe by Surrounded forces. allowedHowever, within highly the Romanian contributed government troops. Stalinized none WarsawPact the of of In theprocess, stayed member countries until there the 1991. movements that for invadedIn Soviet1956, the Pact. the crashedviolently troops and Hungary the revolutionary a short time had managedHeld The becameof power 1994,371-2). Sovietcontrol the clearshortly creation the after of to overthrowinKremlin, in first the especially organization’s 1999,32-77, decadesof (Fodor existence the communist regime. government the to highly obedient Committee, Consultative by a Political were coordinated They activities All non-military Soviet Union. bythe was mainlyprovided and equipment military of Defence. Thestrategies and weredeveloped all documentation Union within the Soviet Defence of the USSR. The head of military of Minister wasthefirstDeputy Warsaw troops The of Supremethe Moscow. Commander staff was also a member of the Soviet embeddedMinister in power-sharingthe andinstitutional mechanisms.headquarters Its was in butwasalso organization, members of the betweenthe in only not visible, relations the Even more than the Comecon, security organization. Itremained sountil its in dissolution early the 1990).1990s (Fodor the Warsaw Pact was Western tothe intendedbe acounterpart was therefore to 1955). Thisdominated WarsawPact Pact by the Soviets. (Warsaw Union of Soviet the initiative the in Warsaw at in signed they concerns a treaty This was Although Germany was not afounding member of the NATO, the German question had been akey issue for 63 Several days later, the members of the communist bloc explicitly expressed these expressed explicitly bloc communist the of members the later, days Several 131 CEU eTD Collection Romania seized the opportunity Romaniaforeignand theopportunity embarkedin policy. seized a quasi-independent Ceau Nicolae of newleadership the Under 2005, 37). (Mastny PragueSpring the after Sino-Sovietthe in split 1961, withdrew from officially organizationthe neverand returned following Union Soviet the with differences ideological Pactover leftthe had who Albania, security relations34-9). The consequences of forcethis action longwere lasting and settled much of the within the communist bloc in the remainder of the Cold war period. However, given66 the high37). political65 costs1994, 435-6) (Held Chinese the of as good as were they that such demonstrate to order in actions, such towards inclined an more were action disputeafter between the theCzechoslovak USSR64 and China. In 1958, invasion,after Chinese troops this withdrew was fromrather North Korea, the Soviets leader position. butits maintained Sovietthe Union with members, contributed Romania, troops except the Warsaw This time Pact decided PolitburoSovietCzechoslovakia. invasion the of the Therefore, Europe. Eastern and Central in decline control’s its of beginning the USSR the for meant have might Union Soviet by the set path the from a deviation allowing Yet, reform be toned down but the country would be allowed to pursue its own way to socialism. the leaders agreedthat Soviet andthe Alexander Dubcek, government, of Czechoslovak the by allowing the penetration “imperialist”of elements. After a series negotiations,of the head exception ofRomania, accusedthe of endangeringreformers communism inCzechoslovakia some of the social areform would had program Czechoslovak introduced havethat government liberalized and political the in1968, later, In years Czechoslovakia. place would several take Europe lifeEastern of the and in Central force country.military Soviet the of manifestation impressive most the However, The Warsaw Pact partners, of SecondWorldthe War werewithdrawn (Held 1994,435). with the (Berendmatter 127). 1996, In return, theSovietstationedin troops country the since theend Atthat time, there were rumours that Romania might have been next on the invasion list of the SovietUnion. Interestingly, Romania had not beeninvited tojoin and, like NATO, was caughtby (Mastny surprise 2005, Partially, this was the result of previous negotiations with the Soviet leaders, as well as an effect of the 65 The movementreform was easily crashed (Skilling 1976, Mastny 2005, 132 64 ú escu, 66 CEU eTD Collection unlikely. Ceau unlikely. fact it was abletohandle the convinced that partly situation, the Moscow using government produced serious international criticism against the Soviets. It is also probable that the Polish had already inthat Afghanistan inaconflict involved time was atthat USSR the fact that troops. Most probably, this rathersurprising intervention lackof was strongly to related the early as 1980, when crisisinthe Poland had an notgenerated invasion by Warsawthe Pact as werepresent firstsigns Its approach. moreby relaxed a wasreplaced doctrine Brezhnev the Gorbachev, Mikhail leader Soviet reformist the of uprising the following later, half of economic made seem partnerships sword lessburdensome.this Damocles A anda decade relations and trade of West-East the asthere-establishment 1970s,aswell of early the militarySoviet still political (Held heldsignificant Union 372). Yet,the détente power 1994, severely sanctioned Consequently, of any attempt pursuingthe development adifferent path could have been by the USSR, as long157). The Brezhnev doctrine defined socialism andcommunism following Soviet the model. as the Warsaw Pactintervene whenever socialism and the pathtocommunism hadbeen threatened (Held 1994, was still in force Union of to Soviet leader therightthe proclaim to Brezhnev Soviet Leonidprompted the and theexperience Czechoslovak the that fact the nevertheless was consequence important most The (Berend Mastny 1996,133-7, 2005, 38). Union Sovietoffend remainedNevertheless, cautiousRomanian the notto government the law. international the asof well as affairs, in internal non-interference mutual of principle Ceau (Mastny 2005, 38) greatersaying inthe discussions, throughultimately the decision-making was controlled by the Soviet Union. decide which decisions were submitted to a unanimity vote. Inaddition, allies more loyal to Moscow a had the Warsaw Pact. More specifically, the institutional mechanisms of the organizationallowed Moscow to 68 (Berend 1996,116-26, 132-52). intervention military the for required been allegedly had government Czechoslovak the Hungary, in invasion 67 towards a less Moscow-dependent policy (Mastny 2005, 38). Neither the SovietUnion was eager to confront Romania. Instead, it preferred to isolate it at the meetings of The counter-argument brought by the Soviet leaders to these accusations was that, like in the case of the ú escu denounced the invasion of Czechoslovakia as a violation of Pact’s Warsaw the of a violation as Czechoslovakia of theinvasion denounced escu ú escu and his entourage were most probably aware of these chances when they directed Romania directed they when chances ofthese aware probably most were entourage his and escu 68 133 67 CEU eTD Collection administrative territories from from Austria, territories Italy,administrative and later Hungary, in Yugoslavia established Adriatic Working Community, a framework for collaboration of sub-national or sub-federal tourismenvironment, (Cviicand 113-4). transport Suchis 1999, thecase Alps-of the infocused cooperation less on sensitivecross-border fieldslikepolitically culture, local level and at were developed ofthem emerged.Most projects several Consequently, appeased. slightly countries its satellite over control Soviet strict the and War tensions however, Cold (1975), the in Europe forCo-operation Security and Conference Actat the usually discuss cultural to and technical matters. After conclusion the of HelsinkiFinal the level, atsectoral only themselves meet among could states European East Central and Sinceinfluence with the1950sonwards, security over Soviet and the economic relations, 4.5 Hopeful alternatives at the periphery of Soviet power finally be dismantle on 1 July Pact1991 (Warsaw 1991). of the Pact announceAt states theFebruary, 2005,70-2). member followedthe endof Bulgaria later, all (Mastny in a joint communiqué by from Pact Warsaw mid the the theirof year.weeks withdrawal Several the announced the dissolution time 1989). In Czechoslovakia,early January low (Warsaw Pact 1991, Hungary and Poland of the alliance,an all- Soviet-ledsupport the organization wasat region, willingness the to throughout the which would regimes communist of the collapse After the Western world. with the links their strengthen 2005, 60). within the SovietUnion. He thus implicitly acknowledged the right of each country shapeto its future (Mastny claimed that his call had nothing to do withconformity and that it was not necessary that all initiatives generate 69 communism. towards couldpaths their own choose states European in this meant Central that the notstated, Although newapproach practice and openly East fall theUSSR announced 50-7). had very become areality (Mastny 2005, that weak, least,unlikein Not control the Soviet casesandperiod, Polish the on previous the leaders inbeen movement the therehadthat country. stationed astrong the against troops not Soviet In February 1986 at the Party congress, Gorbachev had called for unity within the alliance but he also he but alliance the within unity for called had Gorbachev congress, Party the at 1986 February In 134 69 Most of them chose to chose them of Most CEU eTD Collection ministerial level meetings. On that occasion, there were several important proposals for the for proposals important several were there occasion, On that levelmeetings. ministerial ministerial cooperation through the adoption of a clear periodicity and an increase of supported place 1990in strengthening Itthe of Conference inOctober Tirana. took to academic and civil society academic (Lopandi activities to society andcivil reunions parliamentary from ranging forms, in other also them among cooperation fostering on agreed countries least, participant the Not furtherof projects. object cooperation and for further as in a factor Balkans the minorities issueof the Conferenceaddressed the Interestingly, fields. various in meetings ministerial as well as affairs, foreign of ministers fight againstFurthermore, and they periodic drugs trafficking. meetings of proposed the Balkan TheCountries. stressed participants the cooperatein desire to moreincludingfields, Foreign ofthe Ministers aConference In into reunion the of was transformed 1988, the political level (Kofos 1990). a high at meetings expert multilateral these bring helped which Conference, the to time arrangement,the its true it isolationistto in policy.participatedfor 1987, However, firstthe within this frameworkwithin (Lopandi this place took meetings irregular several 1979and1987, andBetween environment. transport energy, includedfields offurthercooperation.list trade, possible of agriculture, These a forward Romania, put Conference The Yugoslavia. Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey together and forExperts Economic andTechnical an Cooperation (1976), initiativeGreece thatbrought of such mostviewpoint, the important was of arrangement Conference Governmental the apolitical From 1980s. late the until matters technical on strictly maintained cooperation chapter 7. chapter in detail more in discussed are issues These initiatives. intergovernmental regional new generated period Hungary maintain anddevelop relations with lasting their Western neighbours, which post-Cold inthe War bloc but which managed to attract two of the communist countries. This collaboration helped SFRY and Alps-Adriatic Working Community may be seen as a project of regional cooperation external to the communist 70 1978 (Alps-Adriatic Working 2004). Community 1978, Initially, Germany also participated, while Hungary was includednot until the mid 1980s. Forthis reason, the ü 2001, 54). During all this time, AlbaniaDuring remained outside allthis 2001,54). time, 135 ü 2001, 55, Kofos 1990, 211-7). A 1990,211-7). 2001,55,Kofos Second 70 At intergovernmental level, intergovernmental At CEU eTD Collection but none survived the peace arrangements that followed. In their aftermath and mainly in andmainly aftermath In their followed. that arrangements peace the survived nonebut Germany, and Britain Great France, usually powers, Western various by indirectly supported hadbeen initiatives of most these precursors, Interwar Like their War. World Second the ofexclusively wereephemeral there by regional generated projects logicthe cooperation of Second, new in a war. signatories eventuality tothe the of guarantees offerwell as to certain as actors, major European of the aggressiveness increasing and the of threat the revisionism guard against means to asa period Interwar the concludedduring protectionist agreements economic and security were there First, War. Cold the of end before the in area the fact, maybeidentified In five arrangements regional Europe. wavesof Central and Eastern in phenomenon communist apost only not is certainly regionalism international up, sum To end the of ColdWar. before the established initiative cooperation cooperation (N framework of enhanced of a Balkan project entire the halted inYugoslavia crisis the Foreign Affairs Adrian N Adrian Affairs Foreign of Minister former Romanian as However, in arrangement. a regional participate to Europe Eastern and inCentral countries for the rationale was nolonger dominant the of threat fear area,the inthe time first For the cooperation. intergovernmental regional positive truly Affairs Petre Roman and Adrian countries.N participant the among cooperation of parliamentary the scope the Conference established At that time, as former Romanian Prime Ministers and Ministers of Foreign establishedfollowinginyears (Lopandi the have been should in theBalkans Cooperation and onSecurity andaConference Athens), Balkan developmentDevelopment of the institutional framework of the Balkan cooperation. Most notably, a Bank, Institute for Studying Balkan Economic Cooperation (in ă stase 2005). This marked the end of regional intergovernmental endof This marked last the stase the 2005). ă stase acknowledged in an interview with the author, shortly shortly after, with author, the in aninterview acknowledged stase ă stase recall, it seemed that this was the beginning of a * 136 * ü 2006, 56). In 56). May in 2006, 1991 the Bucharest, * CEU eTD Collection time. that of context political The tensed increasingly the in signatories the protect to Coldand confrontation War generationavoidmilitary during a new to period,the attempted asthey Europe in concluded of the rest of multilateral alliances the to similar very arrangements, alliances wereregional agreements Interwar The time. same the at in the world elsewhere created ones the to similar arrangements which shows War,duringgenerated regional thestates intergovernmental Cold Central and EastEuropean especially a counterparts, greaterEuropean their of most than internationally isolated more Although diversity outliveeither. them not could cooperation wave ofregional last the area,the throughout than regimes. Within communist the of collapse the much survive not the did Comecon the and Pact context Warsaw the of the Yugoslav reasons, ideological and political For both sphere. Soviet from the distance Balkan countries disintegration andattempted the crisis to developthat it level, generatedand sectoral firsttechnical asat established initiatives, The new Europe. Eastern a more consolidated in South again once schemes appeared, intergovernmental fifth structure of bloc,type regional a of cooperationin could 1980s, late Europe When,pressure decreasedwithin Sovietthe the embark. the as a means to helpof the the securitymost shaped these four decades, more than For (Comecon). Assistance Economic for Mutual and economic and Council the camp:Warsaw Pact the in communist Warthe period Cold the of cooperationinitiatives in regional best-known of creation the led tothe of area the ended.The USSRcontrol Europe which the countriesestablishment of andCentral development inthe influence Western the With this, in area. the power of Soviet the consolidation the and of regional Eastern schemes vanishedwith few War projects Cold early these by 1950s, of the end the Britain. However, of cooperation in Centralespecially uncertain and warEurope of fromGreat enjoyed support circumstances some post and Eastern Yugoslav, Greekand Turkish attempts toplay a more important role in region the within the Europea Eastern They of South initiatives resultthirdregional developed. werethe type of 137 CEU eTD Collection issue of issue in of inrepresentations is regional furtherterms detail developed in nextchapter. the This other. the than peaceful less not often interaction, political a symbolic-representational and to claims confrontations direct of realm the from shifted have regionalism international European in East and and present Central are nation-states of creation the accompanied suggest still such Balkan the conferences of but meetings technical eventhe project (con)federation problems.Balkan is the this for illustration best The arrangements. intergovernmental regional One within interaction to transferred areoften problems These in region. the nation-states can also Russiannotice or Soviet that, factorin relation with regional cooperation, equallyseem if not sometimes morein importantto than the be time,the infurtherfrom areas Sovietthe understand influence. To the evolution foreignthis of policy problems many that have beEuropean seems slightlystates to moreindependent particularly than thought, previously of characterized the tensions East and Central of policy foreign War, the Cold the decades of the two first in the especially creation of that althoughdevelopment. words, much In other influenced orconstrainedbytheUSSR than bymany historical onesuggested the of accounts region’sthe socio-political relations international of dynamic overall the with synchronization better a indicates War Central internationaland EastEuropean regionalism before end the developed of Cold the perspective, this From regionalism international of wave second ofthe features incipient with towardstheir technical penchant security andsofter cooperation, havethe main Balkan – the Conferences, projectscooperation the latest intergovernmental of least, regional wave of regionalism, with incooperation hard security issues dominating the agenda. Not usually in acknowledged discipline,isthe largely also synchronic with restthe of firstthe 138 CEU eTD Collection identified and each can be illustrated with a specific regional identity legacy. First, there is there First, legacy. identity regional with a specific be illustrated can each and identified degrees may bethus of marginality Four consecutivedistinctions. through constructed shortcomings, Ipropose to look at these traditions following the way in which “otherness” is presentlinearsuch is to in any attemptAware structure traditions these reductionist. a of nature, given their of palimpsest Furthermore, a dissertation. incomprehensively chapter the reinforce this memory marginality.of Thisfascinating topic is largetoo tobe treated spaceoften in this simultaneously present traditions regional Thevarious Europe. restof the and of legacies features most cultural marginal, sharing the while neglected, the other, the being as) frustration (perceived the thememory of encapsulates about Europe and Eastern time, something seems to be common to all imprints. To a large extent, the space of Central same the At texture. same on the texts different of imprints consecutive through generated are palimpsests inwhich way the to similarly hybridizing, mutually and overlapping often cases of international regionalism that Ianalyze in the next part of the dissertation. These are by to suggested seven locusthe related identity legacies thatare regional geographical the only address those to large, Ichose is very identity regional of topic the Since regimes. framework of regional intergovernmental cooperation before the fall of the communist regionalrespect to identity, viz. major identity the regional developedtraditions outside the with legacies major the reviewing regionalism, international of case this of background discursive the I briefly examine chapter, Inthis regimes. communist of collapse the the intergovernmental cooperation wereestablishedthat in before Central and Eastern Europe andEuropean Eastregionalism. thisFor Iidentified purpose, the various forms of regional In the previous Iinvestigated chapter, the institutional background of contemporary Central R C EGIONAL IDENTITY PALIMPSESTS HAPTER 5 139 CEU eTD Collection closer to the Middle East. Not least, northern Europe’s islands are frequently caught in islandsfrequently the caught are northern Europe’s Middle Notleast, tothe closer East. is also Cyprus of respectively. parts America andAfrica Geographically, arerather Madeira in Greenland,and inthis Azores, it land Oceanand the the Atlantic not only Europe. place IcelandYet, many raised among geographers of geographic becausethe questions features British andIrishbelong islandsseem to continentthe to from a geomorphicview. point of On a closer examination,none of the other limits of Europe is any less clear. In the West, the 1992). (Le Quintrec fact itscientificbecame until a wasperpetuated and error Europe this 18 the In mind. to comes that first the is probably Urals” the to Atlantic the “from formula the Europe, lessons about from most peoplegeography remember their If is that something there 5.1. Eastern Europe: The invention of the “Other” purposes. for political tools legitimization usedas andfinally features various given emerged, then fourthe categories constructing waylookingthe “otherness,”of identities at have regional 9.This briefly eachof cooperationin chapter initiatives isanissue chapter presents explored develops in region.the Whether thisbackground is used reflectedinor currentthe regional regionalism international which on background identity regional is the This examples. such are Sea” “Black and “Baltic” marginal. essentially as collective mental in the remained and illustration of this is asan “Balkans” develops. The used normative competition marginality narratives of case. Finally, there Here, I focus mostlyborder. legacy. “Central Europe” amongthe on different Third, are regional identitythis about is anarrative Then, there in point. is case the West and between East distinction narrativesThe marginal. the becomes border thatthe beyond one the and instituted have first is a border developed way, this In “Other.” the of invention an through distinction regional a bipolar of creation the th century, some Dutch geographers arbitrarily chose the Urals as eastern frontier of 140 CEU eTD Collection communistfashionable block made of again of Central idea the Europe, which I talkin the attemptat dissociating their from Soviet countries the influence, dissidents from the either (Wolff L. 1994).This dilemma reachedits climax during the ColdWar, in when, their Russia definitelywas not from butexcluded it Europe was notunconditionally included init time, Atthat philosophers. by have formulated seems Enlightenment the to Europe, been geographically, culturally, politically. and like This problem,just that of defining Eastern especially afterWar Worldwhodoconsiderpush or want II, to Russia Europe, outof authors however, are, There countries. European other of development the on history of impactRussia’s the of and (high) culture Russian character denytheEuropean can hardly its successor states. Most of Russia’s territory isnowadays situated beyond the Uralsbut one limit into a political border as well. isfact duetopolitical the Urals questioned factors, did transform that, not geographical the Urals have belonged to the Russian Empire Uralsissometimes tothe those closer of character European for which, the reason and then to East and framed Westhasbeen instrong normative terms L.1994).The(Wolff second which (Du identified then was with Europe West themore with developed identified amore “civilized” often culture, modernization on discourse The part. Western the to compared development technological and economic Urals hashad a slower to sotheyears areacloser hundreds or last in two the literature, reasons seembe frequently shores abouttheirTwo of Atlantic,the to questioned Europeanness. seem to accountDespite such difficulties, thosefor who are closer to the Urals, probablythis. more than those on the positively. First, contribute can warming global which to few the of one forprobably issue, adebatable still is it various reasonscontinuously reshaping ice field in Arcticthe Ocean as part of butuntilEurope, latitude what extensivelytreat the to tend scholars delimitation, of solve in problem to the order sothat, ice fields debated in the 141 Ġ u 1999). In this way, between distinction the CEU eTD Collection Europe evenEurope Cold the after War (Du traditional epitome of the latter, has remained an important imprint for Central and Eastern arguments, the distinction between a “good West” and the “evil East”, with Russia as the Schöpflin (1989), 7-9. (climate, settlements etc.), culturally and historically (which also implies that it had neverbeen European). See Revolutionit had beenEuropean), he insisted that Russia is completely different from Europe, geographically 71 Leninthe for (Šime whatandStalin regimes had committed should avoid Russiawith confounding USSR,andthe Russiansbe should that blamed not to one werethat main arguments it. isolate The to than ofRussia characteristics European emphasize the moremighthaveit useful to that been suggesting more moderate, were inconsistent. make his argumentation with consequencesthe of meaningthe he gave to“being even European,” though this might non andless being Russia’s morecorollary, with Europeanness concerned demonstrating this of beseems unaware to authors, other like many Schöpflin, However, “Europe.” from many likethis oneforinstance, cultures, perspective, shouldbe theGreek other excluded generating an essentiallySchöpflin’s different social developmentin difference relevant only the Therefore Russian. the including elites, European most compared terms to Western (ibid. Except of itspower Reform 10-1). the been had aftermath,and these of features the Europe.would From be Enlightenment, Romanticism andNationalism, finally, separation and the and secularization the the religiousmovements, Counterreformation and Reformation the rationalism, and skepticism one,Judeo-Christian and Greek heritage, Medievalwith Christian universalism, Renaissance Christian European current (SchöpflinThis 1989,7). Schöpflin current, isclaims, characterized bythe dominant the followed longer no it on time that from because Revolution Bolshevik the Orthodoxy after from itselfEurope excluded USSR, with the identified For some, Russia, nextsection. portrayed as Afterasserting that after 1917,Russia is longerno European(which impliesthat before October the Ġ u 1999). 71 Even in the context of the Cold War logic, others logic, War Cold the of context in the Even 142 þ ka 1989).Despite such ka CEU eTD Collection was, however,very a loose with structure common no government orof head state (Geiss 1997, 36-7). Bund 72 could“super-state” think have only that such a appeared under their rule. it became to empires, theonly natural Germans supranational were thathadestablished ones 1960, Since “super-state” andthe Judt 1991). Austrians European (Meyer1955,Droz the another of creation the necessary made had Empire Roman Holy the of destruction the when, at the 1815 Congress of Vienna, the Austrian foreign minister Metternich claimed that mightleast be hundredyearsbeginningcareer one Central placed of earlier, at Europe’s the Meyer(1955), notably most scholars, several to according Naumann. However, writtenEurope), in 1915 by a German Lutheran pastor converted politicsto namedFriedrich invoking a book, have theirCentral started account Europe idea of the of theorigins establish to attempted that authors most decades, last two In the in half 20 the second of particularly the in most developed one, this butthe narrativescompeting sense are a rigid Several line. moreare also fluid of suggesting representations border, the of a“bufferzone”imageinstead “Iron Curtain” between the two camps was just separating notcovering territories. Yet, there line. The demarcation very thin andvery clear, rigid asa wasfrequently border represented War this Cold the During uncertainty. another hasbeen always there “West,” andthe “East” The bipolar of wasnotEurope division a the thatonly marginality. operated the Between 5.2 Insearch theof Middle Ground on which there is widespread agreement. First, the early development of the idea of of Central of idea the development early the First, agreement. is widespread on which there several points are there as notion, political Europe Central origins of debatable the Despite withinfuture in or opposition imperialto the (le rule Rider 1994). of when groups anumber Habsburgthe initiated projects ethnic the their Empire of about beginning of is history concept’s the alsosometimes placed after revolutionsthe of 1848, The “super-state” imagined by Metternich existed also in reality. The German Confederation ( Confederation German The reality. in also existed by Metternich imagined “super-state” The ), which functioned between 1855 and 1866, could be seen as an historical embodiment of this idea. This idea. of this embodiment historical an as seen be could 1866, and 1855 between functioned which ), th century, has been that of a Central/Middle Europe. 143 Mitteleuropa 72 (literally Mid- Not least, the Deutscher CEU eTD Collection Switzerland, as a means for solving the problems of the monarchy. an into Eastern be transformed Hungary that proposed Hungarian War,the Oszkár Jászi World First the of beginning the before shortly Similarly, ambitions. expansionist Russian and German the against Danube the along nations small the of unification the for militated same kind as Palacký. Inhis example,from forward Aurel aRomanian ideaspublicist Transylvania, Popovici, put the of for In1906, still fashionable. half projects Afterwere such acentury, Hungarian Empire. Austro- the of creation the to led eventually territories in theHungarian unrest political minority its communitieslater, social 1990,Rumpler the year one (Bérenger 1997).Nevertheless, and within resonated that idea an entities, national political eight in Empire in a division of František Palackýproposed Habsburg the Czechhistorian 1866 the instance, For influence. some political moment atacertain gained projects of some these Empire, Imagined mainly by intellectuals belonging minorities tothe of Austro-Hungarianthe moment. the of interests political the justify to way a Austria-Hungary) either meansas a solveto certain problems of nationalthe minorities or as German federations poles two the confederations (Prussia and built onearound power of and wasof expressed inprojects In cases,both Europe 1991, 513-7). ideaof the a Central Foucher (LeRider48-52, Mid-Europe 1994, idea of Naumann’s of real the predecessor Rumpler (1997), Kann (1974), and Bérenger (1990). 73 the space called a of cultural or existence theethnical, geographical indicates Austria-Hungary and about hadmajor notion meanings.interrelated Central of two Europe in is One or used regularly much the 19 Second, during the is Germanspeaking space. Europe confined to For the impact of these projects and their authors’ role and activity in Austria-Hungary, see for instance Danubian region The United States of Greaterof The UnitedStatesAustria . The other meaning is associated to pan-Germanism and is 144 73 , Popovici particularly th century the century CEU eTD Collection path of unification. (Grumbach1916, viii) German the was nations European Central of the organization the for suitable model the Naumann, for like them, For Europe. Central organized strongly a of need the emphasized both England, against mainly to economic issues, von and Liszt was more interested in ageneral political program oriented clearly and CustomUnion between Germany andAustria-Hungary famous Austrian professor from the Vienna University, Eugen von Phillipovich, wrote Europe’s Statesthe other - entitled One, audience. international the on impact certain a had perspective German sense in eitherAustria-Hungary), -only could anarrow and Germany beEurope understood 74 Mitteleuropa spacewithin and not theAustro-Hungarian Empire.is This Friderich Naumann’s imagined Prussian the within was,however, projects best-known Retrospectively, of the one rejoinder to Naumannrejoinder to ( half of second in the the employed extensively been had distinctions his 20(since concept the of history the to contribution important an and Europe Central on perspective pro-active A similar 1915, 44). by by Alexander”(Naumann eastwards pushed, first andthenwestwards Napoleon, Tsar one from Paris to Moscow, and one from Moscow to Paris. In both cases Central Europe was Naumann, during 19 the notice that his isstrong butcriticismhe encounter not interesting enemies. It Prussia’s could also from to Germanprotect the who would itthose civilization against threaten (Neumann 1915, 30-1) Powers whoseCentral the of military equivalent the was Europe Central that stated Naumann when force Therefore, should be reorganizedappeared duringWorldWar by Iand waswritten a quiteknown well Prussian politician. under the rule of Germanyit fact that by the explained be rather should French and English into translations immediate in order to andits volume the to reactions international the context, historical Inthat manoeuvre.” expression “German space of of more abstract within the debates pan-Germanist Before the publication of . The book was hardly original. (1915) was authored by a renowned German economist of those times, Franz von Liszt. A th century), belongs to the German writer and politician Ernst Jäckh. In a Mitteleuropa th The Largest CentralEurope Mitteleuropa century “there are two principal advances in the Napoleonic War: in Napoleonic advances the principal two “there are century does not cover a fixed space. For instance, to according cover For afixedspace. not does , two other booklets concerning Central Europe examined from a from examined Europe Central concerning booklets other two , 145 74 Its major contribution was a synthesis of the of a synthesis was contribution major Its (1915).Althoughvon Phillipovich attention paid ), he introduced the idea that Central that idea the introduced he ), A Union of theCentralA Union An Economic Zollverein CEU eTD Collection early 20 19 the end of appeared atthe that definitions region’s geographical the in also reflected is interestingly Central Europe of notion the of for neutrality The concern - Europe distance from distance from this historically, culturally and geopolitically. German term of longer focused andthe been credible no onCentral perspective on was Germany Europe more negativeacquired it thus and actions its legitimize to Hitler by used was it I, War connotationsWorld political than notion before.continued to be closelyTherefore, linked to the evolution after of the theGerman defeatstate. After of the Third Reich, any demonstrates that the German the that demonstrates uses of term in the the Federal Republic of Germany the during 1980s, GartonAsh(1990) convincingly 75 During the first half 20 the of of Central Europe, whatever it meant, if the imperialists defend it (ibid.). CentralUnited States of Europe and probably mostthe extravagant belonged Karl to inKautsky who, a 1916booklet( Britishxi). (Grumbach mostagainst 1916, Nevertheless, interests the extreme simplification Germany with in Jäckh’s book an ( article sameyearto replied the Zimmermann to adhere.which andTurkey,Austria-Hungary, to Bulgaria Greeceand shouldbe Romania convinced Less Germany, between andalliance military political functioning pragmatic Mediterranean,” a subtle shouldEurope be“a political organism stretchingfrom Northernthe Sea to the and in a Central an effective that he reckoned However, x-xi). 1916, (Grumbach Switzerlandand certainScandinavia Netherlands, the adds he which to powers German two the - one larger in a or extent similar to von Liszt, a certain Emil Particularly Hanák (1989, 68)and Judt (1991, 29)support this view. However, inan article analyzing the th ), where he stated that Central Europe was not a useful concept unless itwas builtunless a useful was not concept Central that Europe where hestated ), Zentraleuropa century. For instance, the French geographer Auguste Himly simply stated that the that stated simply Himly Auguste geographer French the instance, For century. Mitteleuropa Mitteleuropa , but thiseliminate didnot all undesirablemeanings.the Mitteleuropa hasbeen avoided. th century, the destiny of Central Europe ( , the Austrians even invented another word for thisof word eveninvented another part Austrians , the ), had argued that the proletariat should be against the idea shouldbe againstthe proletariat the hadargued that ), has not been totally discredited and has been recently reconsidered recently been has and discredited totally been not has 146 75 During the Cold War, in order totake in DuringWar, Cold the order th century century and inthe Mitteleuropa The Largest ) as a The CEU eTD Collection anything in with 1997). Immediately elsecommon Nazi the warand the after (Magris have not peoples and had of countries woulddenominator otherwise region,the whose so until the World War II, havein The limits beenalsodefined thefewEurope of theCentral did For cultural terms. who German culture was often seen andWestern Europe continental the EuropeEastern (DeMartone 1930). as the main if not the between transition space of is that Europe onlyCentral that he considered when criterion doubtful of borders) World technicalthe the Warusedan (includingpeace treaties, details I equally for responsible Commission International in the geographer expert Martonne, de Emmanuel heis only legitimizing notthe Yet, In1926, one. for hisdistinctions. geography criteria certain sympathy the made towards region, him combine which with physical political War hadWorld French victims I,the perceivedgeographer as of pan-Germanism during the First World War, in to WorldWar,contrast First the of aftermath in the emerged that nation-states new the designating for lands) Habsburg (the Ancel employed the expressions the employed Ancel Austrian and German traditions. the between distinction the aware of still were geographers some period Interwar the For instance, threeinternational brought forward thepan-Germanistcontext in understandingof Central Europe, years after Hitler took power, Jacques rarely included in a such overview). group ethnic (an Gypsies even and Yugoslavs, Transylvania, from Romanians Hungarians, Poles, Czechs, described the 77 reliefBelgium. and Netherlands, and the Switzerland, some major considered,he without providing any argument,sound of asparts Europe Central Austria-Hungary, -Prussia, events in the76 history of Prussia (and then of Germany), Austria, of the mannermoreflexible arbitrary. defined though theareaina equally importance of Aulneauregion equally by butPrussia, preoccupied (1926) political the region (Himly 1876). the characterize that physical units important most second are the Mountains Carpathian while of RhineAlpsmajor DanubeEurope, andthe Central andthe arethe determinants Interested more inthe populations who live inthe middle of the continent and less in the formal frontiers, he Inorder to illustrate his point, Himly focused on the geography theand most significant events of some states 76 Half a century later, less concerned with the physical features of the features physical the lesswith concerned later, acentury Half Europe Danubienne Mitteleuropa 147 (Ancel 1936). Since these countries were (Danubian andEurope) 77 Although the Habsbourgie CEU eTD Collection allowed their voices to be more easily heard within allowed tobe more world easily heardWestern voices their the Not (Falk within 2000). had counterpart, This scholarshouses links from also publishing and with Occident. stronger Western any other with often comparable intellectuals, These Poland. and Czechoslovakia, intellectuals rule butalsoit. Second, struggles of the debates against weremainly by initiated reminded imperial concept an of equally butequally one Danubian Sovietthe painful. The fromthan recent less one), German (the domination another formerof Europeans Central reminded latter territoriesCarpathian)meaning built thearound Austrian andrule the pan-Germanist into account several factors.of First, from thethe two precedents couldifonetakes be explained Europe on Central perspective thisrestrictive The successof of the notionHabsburg - the Danubian (or West. closer tothe Europe aCentral with Empire,identified then was Empire) Habsburg the of history the extension, temporal through (and, namely ofglory moments Austria-Hungary’s more precisely and, context particular That Budapest. from became àlawrite abouthistorians to mode Viennathen among and fin-de-siècle, on Prague Hungary, end atthe 19 of occurred the countries usually in Central prosperity the andcultural of that certain European political,period economic This is trend bynostalgiaaccompanied for the previous andregime more for precisely a political purposes. mix not a revitalised.butfor and it of Thistime,was acultural warfare geography politics was questforaCentral the Europe incountries, satellite the andopposition dissidence with intellectual Yet, developmentforof allowed camps. differentiations withinthe the hardly Americans, the and Russians the between a conflict as expressed simplistically East, and Soviet West the between a democratic polarity the world. Initially, in theWestern Europe, be itEurope, Germany’s vision on the matter still fresh in the collective memory, the idea of a Central Mitteleuropa or Danubian region 148 th century and in the early 20 , seemed tobe definitively forgotten, at least th Mitteleuropa century. Thus, it , the CEU eTD Collection of Europerecentlyof Eastern influence. of outside Russian for referring part the has it although used asthe more politically increasingly correct to been may generate. it that confusions potential the by as well as Europe,” “Eastern of connotations negative the by haunted been has notion the However, crossed. easily politicians and scholars Western as communist satellite countries there was only a short distance, which many dissidents, as well Western. From here to was whoserest largerEurope of a Central part wereconsidereda states these meantthat This establishing the Westernand Yugoslavia. In other words, it referred to almost all the communist(or but non-Soviet states. at least non-Russian)Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, the Democratic Republic of Germany, Albania, character of territories the and generous designated very career was inits early concept this the region, of the usually referred to as Eastern Europe. to usually referred hadbeen War World Second sincetheendof the bloc, which communist of countries the the publicationsthat reach suchthe as without as well as West, the in respected and known well were that voices of support the Milan Kundera’s 1984 article on the“Tragedy of Central Europe” reached.Without the political momentum, Europe established and had otherthe side of on Iron Curtain (Judt the 1991).Yet, none Eastern hadthe impact that and Central fled had that figures intellectual renowned from came them of Many West. the to closeness against the Soviet domination and forthe uniqueness of the satellite countries orfor their cultural and historical 78 expression employ the to started intellectuals midA more in pragmatic perspectiveappeared when the politiciansboth and 1970s Détente. the worldafter Western of the expectations Russianspiritthe well rule)reductionism, through (and fitted Soviet against the political the against arguments articulated Central radically Europe on thefact this discourse that least, Western East(ern) Europe seem almost impossible categories for the normal collective imaginary. collective normal the for categories impossible almost seem Europe East(ern) Western or Europe East(ern) Western Yet, one. eastern an and western a be also might there Europe, of Eastern area replace it with Central East(ern) Europe. This version,80 however, would imply that, as long as there79 is did. it a central extent the to imaginary collective Western the permeated have not would Europe Central Throughout the entire Cold War period there had been numerous cultural, political and economic arguments economic and political cultural, numerous been had there period War Cold entire the Throughout Journalists, for instance, find it difficult to remember the order of the words in the expression and frequently and expression the in words of the order the to remember difficult it find instance, for Journalists, According to Keith Crawford, the term would have beencoined by JosephRotschild (Crawford K1996, X). 80 These shortcomings make it less clear in on the collective map of Europe, of map collective the in on clear less it make shortcomings These The New York Review of Books 79 Like in the case of all the discussions concerning in the discussions caseof Like all the 149 could offer, itisprobable that the restrictive concept of East CentralEast Europe 78 to differentiate between differentiate to CEU eTD Collection defined (Todorova 1994, 1997). clearly geographically and historically are “Orient,” the unlike “Balkans,” the because category different (Baki outside the overall orientalist context [because] itshares an underlying logic and rhetoric with orientalism.” orientalisms” because, despite a particulardiscourse about theBalkans, “it would be difficult to understand it For instance, Milica Baki Milica instance, For Orient;… a Westernstyle dominating,for restructuring, and having authority Orient” over 1978,the (Said 3). speciesof “Orientalism,” term coined by Edward Said to denote “the corporate institution for dealing with the domination, although sometimes Byzantinethe legacy is also added.This attitude mightbe considered a 83 (Inalçik 1960). “mountain” would and beending part the of translation of the toponymancient the “Haemus mountains” political notion. The later term and Balkan is ageographical most as probably of Balkans of emergence Ottoman the origin, to as inOttoman contribution Zeune’s Balkan would emphasizing meanin detailed most 82 81 the about concerned or/and places the of flavour Oriental the by fascinated became region and the discovered travellers Western of number increasing an sametime, the At referring totheTurkish either ruleto or ethnicthe origins of autochthon the populations. with benames continued designated to administration or occupation Turkish area underthe inThe modern would inaccuracies havestarted early the 19 Balkans]”: image[of the a frozen of forsuch the “persistence explanation an suggested Europeasconcepts, Eastern andSouth Balkans the history in events of the analysisimportant of Balkans’introducingthe Todorova, image,Maria while most the ironical lucid withfirstofherchapter Balkans. In tothe operated the that often and respect andimprint is from a important and “Central division thirdEurope” Europe” Apart“Eastern 5.3 Competing marginalities fifteenth century, were designated astheBalkans. designated century, were fifteenth the from apparently that, mountains bythe north in the limited land the peninsula” “Balkan AugustZeune called German the twoSouth Europeans peninsulas,geographer other the That is the reason why most scholars consider as Balkan states those who experienced the Ottoman the experienced who those states Balkan as consider scholars most why reason the is That Within current scholarship onSouthEastern European historical narratives, Todorova (1994,1997)are the In anearlier version, the main ideas of this chapter outlined are in Todorova(1994). ü -Hayden1995, 920).Maria Todorova,however, argues attitude the that towards theBalkans forms a particularly 1989(Todorova after 1997, 7). and retroactive ascription of the ideologically loadedthe designationreverse and subsequent its andthe from object, of designation the dissociation complete to the region, overtones, ideological and cultural, World‘Balkan’beginning War I;and(3)the useof of around pejorative the social, political, with appellation tradition; saturation later (2)the of knowledgethrough geographical the transmitted It is story the innocentof inaccuracies(1) stemmingimperfect from geographical ü -Hayden argues that in the case of former Yugoslavia one could talk about “nesting about talk could one Yugoslavia offormer case the in that argues -Hayden 150 82 81 However, until the late 19 th century when, in analogy with th century century this 83 CEU eTD Collection insidiously challenge the local connotations. to seems world the of rest in the has Balkans the that weight negative the contexts, optimism, exuberance and noisy taste for polemics. Yet, even within these particular cultural subtle kind of humour or irony, (Todorova honor,” incourage, “Balkan” Romanian Similarly, a 1997, 32).describe could a “carpe diem” way of life or a strangeEspecially in Bulgarian,belonging to Balkansthe mightmean having“independence, pride, mixture of moody inimage is positive. Balkans,because spoken insome their rather the of languages the “de-freeze” much area,theperspectiveslook impossible image. Within theirbetter the to nowadaysand be that it acquiredseems social connotations such powerful space, to centuries, they in Balkans, as faced the lasttwo the cultural,political radical transformations and theirheterogeneity the Consequently, moredespite thus than European) Balkans. the (and Westerner more as itself designated which anarea Europe, Central so-called with the in 1990sinto civil negativethe alsowars reinforced image,accentuated by this contrast the whichexploded informer latentethnic Yugoslavia beclashes The to called“balkanization.” susceptible hasbecome ethnic conflict intensifying process of andoriginal thus any content the from dissociated completely almost terms political as employed increasingly been have family semantic its and name the of communism, fall the after intensely more and War Cold 1994). DuringWesternersinhad(Inalçik andthe Quataert became predominant the of eyes Ottoman Empire beginning atthe of 20 the ethnic following slow violent the dissolution of Western public attention the conflicts into brought which Wars Balkan the after Moreover, positively. more valorise usually they better, it knew they which, since culture, own their and indigenes’ the between differences th 151 century, the potential negative image area the negative potential the century, CEU eTD Collection regional identity legacy 1987). (Pistohlkors a genuine not talk Baltic about one therefore, period, could Sovietcontinuedthe during also fact a that other, each with in conflict them brought sometimes This narrative. hinderedhistory national own thetheir creating with more concerned have become Baltic of the shore onthe southern states development after1981). During period, gainingindependence the Interwar Russian the from Empire, of a Balticof regional notion the policies, of Russification the Yet, withpressure 1987). increasing the Pistohlkors identity. 1981).Partially, Initially, the term themselves from Russian-speakingthe andpolitically worldoriented (Rebas 1988, Thaden wasthis rather a classprocess themselves call to than began them of many nationalism, a spatial differentiation region (Thaden 1981).Within the contextof national awareness andincreasing Russian (Rebas 1988, von politically, andculturally. economically largely Theyalso formed the upper classof the inhabitants parts of were German RussianEmpire,thethe area butthe dominating were provinces these time, At that Livonia. and in Estonia living Germans of communities 1988, 103).Thenotion Baltic appears in of onlylater, midthe 19 Lithuania,Latvia forlong (Courland) or which a wereunderPolish time sovereignty (Rebas Federation. 84 Ingria, namely Latvia, of north the and Finland of south the between region coast entire the included These “österjöprovinser.” as provinces Baltic coast Eastern the area,designated the dominated very short. A certain regional delimitation is identity regional theBaltic of history The Seaones. Black the and Baltic cases, the two appeared in just the here mention I 17 marginality. extreme of is that identified be can that imprint fourth The 5.4 Marginality without competition AnareabetweenFinland, Estonia, the Gulf of and Finland Ladogathe lake, now belonging to the Russian Balten quickly became a “means of ideological warfare”(von Pistohlkors 1987,Thaden Pistohlkors ideological warfare”(von becameof a“means quickly 84 Estonia and Livonia. However, they did not include either the south of south the either include not did they However, Livonia. and Estonia 152 Balten th century, when Swedes, who Swedes, when century, in order to distinguish to in order th century century in the CEU eTD Collection economical integrated area(Br integrated economical or of a political havecould the emergence that allowed a peaceful relation thanof tensions more of made it in scene powers the Sea Black the two between the rivalry the century, Russia conquered some of the Ottoman Empire’s territories during the 18 during the territories Empire’s Ottoman the of some Russia conquered small states existingsmall states 14 during the asthe aswell relations, andpolitical commercial the therefore importance, trade immediate The lands by many the around longerBlack Sea,inhabited no populations, different had in region. the interest Western decreased further and Americas the of discovery the led to Venice andGenoa)tried find to new to routes Indiesthe andWest,which Chinathrough the therival (especially colonies The Italian weredestroyed. centres trade Byzantine and local the and inaccessible became Road Silk the lake, interior an into sea the transforming region, centralization of the small fiefdoms in the area. However, when the Ottomans conquered of administrative process the accelerated have which would Black Sea, shoresof the the the and on use SilkmerchantsRoad commercial to develop centres ancientand the Byzantine Italian local, allowed This stability. certain area in Sea Black the created they because aspect Mongolian invasions in duringEurope the 12 investigation. interpretations, many mainstream Contrary to Br Br inStudiesis Bucharest. Anotablein of case pointhistorian extensive work the Gheorghe European for South-East of Institute the agenda the around and studies East European South mainlyframework of weregenerated thelarger this as space Such within attempts a unit. Interwar and the Cold War periods, there the During space. cultural or political geographical, asadistinct lesseven conceptualized were only few attempts to research the in areaaround Cooperation Economic BlackSeawashardlyearly the 1990s, the and studied history of The Black Sea region is an even more recent invention. Until the creation of a Black Sea ă tianu, who focused for the first time on the Black Sea as a unit for historical ă tianu 1969). Such research on the region should be read should region on the Such research tianu 1969). th and 15 153 th century had century when soon vanished. Moreover, th and the 13th century had also a positive also had century 13th the and ă tianu suggested that the tianu suggestedthat th and 19 the th CEU eTD Collection period (Wolff L. 1994). 85 national the manner favorable in a contextualizing for is used discourse regional the which in processes nation-building of case the mostly is This anempire. as such territory, larger aspacethatis least of partof independence to a action someat identity and consequently project may come from withinlocus, and unlikethe separation any other isregionalits geographical transcendsthe that case the “Balkans,” whichacquiredaresonance of the operated identity in order legacyto confer as of perceivedEurope by Westerners. Eastern the in thea political area. At the same in versions many be found can easily time, of Enlightenment the characteristic space. Thisattitude the political many theof fears ornostalgias theof modern world when encountering arelatively different a general encapsulating category into may transform times,aregional distinction Other of Mitteleuropa. concept German Interwar the of case as the aswell Europe, Eastern on vision Western War Cold the caseof the instance, for is, evilarea.This or inferior allegedly contain subdue the to or actions may trigger political Sometimes, suchaperspective evil. or inferior essentially is considered in “other” the which space, of separation normative a implies usually situation This projects. political justify or relations political legitimate can political uses that the reference to or the creation of regional identities might have. First, they in The brief identity several legacies present various areasuggests the the of regional review maps. mental marked collective didthe imprints not identity significantly region, the these around regional economic projects or byanyhighlyvisiblepolitical intellectual and unsupported community European the within visibility major Without exercises. intellectual individual as mostly In fact, as Larry Wolff fascinatingly demonstrates, Eastern Europe is an invention of the Enlightenment of the invention an is Europe Eastern demonstrates, fascinatingly Wolff Larry as fact, In * 154 * 85 isin evenmoreYet, presentthis attitude * CEU eTD Collection initiatives in is in area initiatives morethe a topic detailin explored 9. chapter intergovernmental regional contemporary in also caseof the arepresent reviewed above identity legacies and regional the features Whether these identity narrative. national a significant nation.tension theregional introduces dimension In respect, this the within of fear a regional shared may foundations andthe political identity grouping that the threaten the by as well as participants, potential the of interest national often-divergent the by limited been has proposals these of success The Europe. Central of version Danubian the around may projects of Such atregional likeprojects level, theattempts federalistproduce grouping well this situation but the way the notion of “Baltic” was coined may be also a case in point. forcontextualizing, aswellbe used can asfor discourse relativizing regional that national narratives. demonstrate convincingly they perspectives, regional accommodates it way historiographies.Using thecases ofHungarian,Polish andRomanian historical discourse nationonthe and 86 narratives. Janowski, Iordachi and Trencsenyi (2005) provide anextensive treatment of this topic as reflected innational 86 Thenational debates issueAustria-Hungarian on illustrate the within empire the 155 CEU eTD Collection 1990s have been widely debated and, though a dominant narrative on the issue has not been not has issue the on narrative adominant though and, debated widely been have 1990s early and 1980s in late another after one fell regimes communist the which for motives The 6.1.1 The endof communism briefly reviews the context and the dynamics of these two moments of caesura. Thissection regional situations. two these of in Europe emergedaftermath the Eastern and Central in developed have that initiatives intergovernmental regional the of Most Yugoslavia. of infall the disintegration communism and of arethe Europe 1990s.These the Two major events significantly reshuffled the political configurations6.1 The break ups of Central and Eastern shifting international environmentin which they generated. were the divorce from the previousthe third section examines the foreign policy choices of the former communistpolitical countries after set, are backgrounds two these once regime,Finally, communism. of collapse the after experienced as well as the states institutional European East and Central the that internal at transformations looks the section second The region. the in relations and international of dynamics and conceptualnature the changed that is intochapter themain sections.Thefirst three divided section situations presents regional I examine the political contextin which post Cold War regionalism emerged in the area. The at institutionalCentral and Eastern levels Europe and discursive respectively.In chapter, this in cohesiveness of regional context historical the examined chapters two The previous C A C TRIPLE TRANSITION TRIPLE ONTEXT AND FACTORS OF FOREIGN POLICY CHANGE HAPTER 6 , MULTIPLE TRANSFORMATIONS MULTIPLE 156 : CEU eTD Collection whose elites could express a political message against the regime. Frequently, this message this Frequently, regime. the against message apolitical express could elites whose society civil organized and of active an presence wasalso the process to the Significant regime.the legitimacy of question the under the were presentand continuously put evenYet, in such cases,theprotests andVasile 2007). (Dobrincu population the to unknown largely been had protests, Solidarnosc the to respects and the mass demonstrations place that took in Bra inthe1970s from of Valley instance,in Jiu the miners forthe how, protests Romania, is the This andVasile false(Dobrincu 2007). been have aspotentially information regarded could in any which mistrust, deep of aclimate and created rule communist against the spoke that all voices the These brutally reprimanded German and Romania. the Republic Democratic police secret such as had systems, in that strong developed particularly happened regimes the countries in which the demonstrations could not mobilize most strata of the society. This level (Tism rebuked, theirmemory favoured continuationthe of proteststhe at anincreasingly organized part of population the respectivethe of Thoughmost brutally had countries. of them been 1968PragueSpringthe the 1980s Polish or Solidarity mobilize succeededactions, to alarge social against protests and theregime. political like Some, the 1956Hungarian revolution, importantly,Most installationbeensince have communistrule continuous the there of the systems. totalitarian of the erosion tothegradual contributed in eachof place states these thathad taken andvarious events numerous view of sphere, From domestic of the point the disappearance of the authoritarian and post-totalitarian systems from the region. the end of the Coldsince However, actions. certain specificsocio-political linked to countries andwereusually War some European andEast Central the to external internal and both were factors These process. the for crucial as accepted widely are factors several memory, collective in the imposed yet ă neanu 1992).This reproductionwas, however,protest of in less present the longue durée 157 explanations have been also offered to the to offered also been have explanations ú ov inov 1987, which were similarin many CEU eTD Collection election of election Polishthe Karol of cardinal Wojty lectures and seminars held by dissidents and well-known Westernscholars. and well-known held bydissidents andseminars lectures Poland and Czechoslovakia alsofunctioned underground universityIn (REF). systems thatinformation offereduncensored for channels official to alternative only the was region inmany of which Liberty, the parts means One wasRadioFree Europe/Radio of these censorship. official the fighting for and regime communist the against actions society civil for provided developing themeans andprograms the also DifferentWestern organizations Cambridge (Falk B. 2003, 42-3,92-4). theiracademic out papers of country,the managed even to fullacquire diplomas fromUniversity the of Rorty. students Somethatparticipatedof the to Richard courses inPrague, partiallyand concerted smuggling through of Ricoeur Paul Derrida, Jacques as such intellectuality, ofWestern minds renowned most the of systemof alternative oppositionand education and, most importantly, facilitated the lectures inPrague of some educational foundationwas established. This provided material assistance to the otherwise non-institutionalizeddissident philosopher Julius Tomin, Oxford University became involvedthe in projectof seminars and a without courses offering orrecognised qualifications. In Czechoslovakia, however,through effortthe of 88 Kis in an interview with the author (Kis 2004). similar view, though referring onlyable to the not toHungarian was therefore benefit and propaganda as way than case, other any in degree wasmuchsignificant a to put developed forward from never thinking theby philosophersupport and ofdissident more Jánosliberalintellectuals, whichoften had ramifications ofMarxist inof networks MarxistWestern intellectual creation the circles.spurred Incontrast, had these back Romaniantime, groupsIn going Marxist Luckács. roots György deep to had generations two debate in Marxist the the Hungary WesternIn been. had movements worldopposition other scale (Antohi the to 2004). A Often, these dissidents were children of state officials, afact that may explain why they were not reprimanded countries, the most articulated branch of the oppositiondeveloped originally as dissidence from Marxist circles.and laterof a strong opposition. Inorder to support his hypothesis, he compares Hungary Marxistand Romania. debate In bothwithin acommunist regime was the key factorto the initial development of a strong dissidence 87 countries tolobby differentat international institutions (Tism and governments differentopposition.forms, Thistook rangingfrom publicizing situation the internal of these intellectualsEuropean livinginalso thesupport important West, provided an tothe framework. developed Marxist the within happened mainly initially because much of Central the and dissidence EastEuropean from parties groups Marxistworld. camefrom and This Western assistance certain the rule, communist the of beginning the at Mostly level. spiritual at and terms material in both supported, externally were activity their and elites these cases, many In present. werealso publications, ofpolitical form kinds other protest the took although samizdat of In Poland, the seminars developed in the 1970s around certain dissident circles and were opened to anyone, to opened were and circles dissident certain around 1970s the in developed seminars the Poland, In In aninterview withthe author, historianSorin Antohi interestingly suggests that the existence of a strong 87 Diasporas, including Diasporas, prominentCentral and East 158 á a as Pope in a asPope visit1978 andhissubsequent to 88 Not least, the ă neanu 1992). CEU eTD Collection the unity unity that thebloc,the recommended within (1982-84) andKonstantin Thenewleader Chernenko still inKremlin, (1984-85). preaching following in theLeonidof death Brezhnev and 1982 terms Andropov the short of Yuri USSR, in the power to came Gorbachev Mikhail after only blow to started really change already suggested by adoptthe non-intervention policies that werepowerful of gripmorethe of the satelliteWarsawliberal. countries Pactand even Theencouraged in one Sovietless maysince 1980sthe the Union To these factors, facthad a that add the declinePoland. them to mirror its ofexampleBut the and the Soviet wind ofinfluence in the area was regimes ended most violently (Tism manifested also within the German Democratic Republic. Interestingly,within the communist camp, both based on ahighly nationalist program and increasingly autarkic policies. Similar autistic tendencies were viewpoints. Therefore, unlike mostof his neighbours, Romania was embarking ona ratherneo-Stalinist project, suggestions coming from Moscow to implement policies that were more openfrom botheconomic and politicalcommunist bloc, atleast in terms of foreign policy, Romania’s Nicolae Ceau 89 provided alegal basis for the satellite countries to denounce any Soviet interference. Yet, the state ororganization in the internal affairs of state.Thus,another theHelsinki Final Act any of non-interference of principle the of acceptance the asfor aswell regimes, communist the by principles rights human common the of acceptance the for in exchange so did document The in quo Europe. Warstatus World territorial post-Second the Actrecognised by the US, the USSR and the slowly abandoning its moremajority oppressive measures within Eastern camp.the Signed in 1975 of the other European Union Sovietwas the that fact the signalled already accords Helsinki the these, Before countries, the Helsinki asan understood embarkopportunity to separatepaths. onto Final was this region, in the governments most For spheres. political the and economic the to both a moreapproach open European adopt countries Central and andEast the USSR that to the countries of communistthe bloc (Tism in other later and in Poland first society, civil (re)organizing on effect catalyst a had Poland There were, however, notable exceptions to this trend. Once considered the more liberal mind of the mind liberal more the considered Once trend. this to exceptions notable however, were, There ă neanu neanu 1992, 2003). ă neanu 1992). 159 perestroika and 89 glasnost ú escu opposed fiercely the should not be limited not should CEU eTD Collection in 1990, independence on ethnic grounds was the target for many elites, for newpolitical the target of wasthe grounds independence onethnic in 1990, heard (Pavkovi they became increasingly death Tito, the of after spaceand, public in Yugoslav the present (Jovi itsbetween ethnicgroups different disparities economic solved the or legacies historical different the blended successfully not had that state easilyamulti-ethnic accommodate not could of Yugoslavism and concept the federation of fallthe began Theinstitutional design to federation hadapart. already Yugoslav level the after only a significant at manifested in Yet,these Kosovo. later Herzegovina and in failureviolence, Bosnia- of particularly Yugoslav andinthe the state development in major a role played divisions religious and ethnic long-term the that is accepted It widely 6.1.2 The disintegration ofYugoslavia wouldfollow soon all over region the in latethe 1980s and early 1990s. that collapse the delayed only they measures, such after different much not was development economic as to Yet, approach the from West. technology the import extensively and borrow decayingthe in livingsurvive, standard manyof communistthe To countries. had they to 1970s, not even widelythe falsifiedcould reports hide economic thedisastrous situation and inthe Already interaction. social and political economic, of mechanisms distorted highly had relations beenreal not Soviet-led trade created support ablebut growth to economic particularly on economic grounds. On the long run, the planned economies and the system of least,Not itcan be arguedthatcommunism wasaself-destroying regime. Thiswas visible 1999). (Thomas regimes communist the within actions society civil the supporting for time this transnational networks of human rights activists. For them too the Act provided alegal basis, influential later of Eastern the bloc and groups committees) (Helsinki throughout rights human of emergence the generated This results. most yielded dimension rights human ü 1997, 61-96). After the election of nationalist parties all across Yugoslavia nationalist allacross parties of After election the 1997,61-96). ü 2003). Consequently, separatist voices hadbeen Consequently,separatist 2003). 160 CEU eTD Collection (Markovi and Slovenian republics Croatian ofthe were leaders not satisfiedthe but withthis solution confederation tothe and oftensteppedalternative an as out from basis the federaldemocratic on meetings federation a proposed Montenegro and Serbia Later, independence. for majority overwhelming an yielded that areferendum held 91 the choice for non-communists often implied a choice for nationalism. Consequently,12). 1990 electionsin the valuesthe of dissidence and nationalism were frequently mixed and or otheroractions organized inthese republics regime, against the for orethnic nationalism (Pankovi beenconvicted by the communist government inlast decade of Tito’s dictatorship, forthe mass demonstrations 90 federation. the of unity political the more even weakened which early 20 in entity a single political into joined Slavs Southern sincethe accumulated latent tensions of rapidthe favoured the change escalation suddenregime Yugoslav society, the multiethnic strata. This is instead how, of facilitating the peaceful interestsdialogue of within the social many of radicalization the allowed incidents local of management central weak the improved aswell by briefly strategy, only a shocktherapy situation, economic decreasing should have become aconfederation (Pavkovi Croatia repeatedly asked for greater autonomy within which inYugoslavia, viewtheir and Slovenia republics of federate advanced economically more the freeAfter the elections, a lesserCroatia. and extent to federal government, Yugoslav the mostly involved Slovenia, and one wasashort state Yugoslav the dismantled violently that of wars the The first were children World(Ullman 1996, 1-3, Bank1996). as well as several millions and500.000, 300.000 between estimated a numberdeaths toof generates wars.These civil of displaced or injured and conflicts ofviolent a series through a longmainly characterized to process dismantling persons, led amongin Yugoslavia living communities whom different the among relations identity almost and political the one third asof as well issues, these complexity The of approach. more centralized which required a itsprotect ownsurvival, need and to the government, meantaweakercentral ultimately democratize which to its institutions, desire between the federal republicwascaught The Slovenian parliament went so far as to adopt a declaration on the sovereignty of Slovenia, while Croatia while Slovenia, of sovereignty on the adeclaration adopt to as sofar went parliament Slovenian The For instance, the most prominent new Slovenian and Croatian leaders came from the ranks of those that had that ofthose ranks the from came leaders Croatian and Slovenian new prominent most the instance, For ü th 1996,11-20). These two visionsdifferent onYugoslavia as federation orconfederation were not, century. Within the context of century.increasingly Withinan political thecontextdivided community, of the 161 ü 1997, 123). 1997, 91 Yet, the conservative federal conservative the Yet, 90 Not least, the rapidly ü 1997, 106- 1997, CEU eTD Collection Germany encouraged the two republics to secede and thetwo for republics to Germany whichlater itencouraged recognised their for of unilaterally the which independence The andSlovenia. reasons Croatia recognised international level (Markovi the Treaty of Berlin (1878) since the adoptionof which they maintainedhad full legal continuity at 93 212-3). blocedgrounds on that allegedly he had mandate his perceived asone fordissolving Yugoslavia (Cohen 1993, so. did Slovenia Macedonia and facing a severe crisis after the election of nationalist Croat Stipe Mesi Stipe Croat nationalist of election the after crisis severe a facing 92 23 By deadline of Europe. the basis of the its Declaration on republic federate all toapply of for recognition the of on independence Yugoslavia the their the Guidelines on the Recognition invited Community European the initiallyact of againstanyunilateral secession, Although of New States in Eastern Slovenia. from army federal the of withdrawal territory. After a week(Markovi of armed yet relatively anyear had inaquasi-national police earlier itself Slovenian which organized police, limited the by Hungary and Italy Austria, with clashes borders Slovenian the of control the with and Croatia the conflict ended Slovenia between and with checks institutionborder of the with culminated federal government the Tito’s rule (Cohen 1993, 45-73, Pavkovi of decade last the since Yugoslavia within debates the in present were they form incipient an In new. however, quo (Pavkovi publicmaintainbetter while leaderswere newpolitical support, to the lesswilling thestatus independencevoiceshad timethis a thepro- Slovenia late1980s.Yet, Croatia the and since independence Declarationshad andsovereignty within of conflict. proclaimed beenopenly a surprising(Caplan not This for 2005, 41-8). was any action of involved inthe parties the 1991 of summerthe during secession aprocess of initiated andSlovenia Germany, Croatia by encouraged suchissues. Partially negotiate eager to wasnot state, Yugoslav the on by government, which ahighlywas dominated with nationalistSerbs centralized and vision Serbia and Montenegro did not apply groundson that they had been recognised as independent states through The disputes over the fate of Yugoslavia were also acutely felt at the level of the federal presidency. This was This presidency. federal the of level the at felt acutely also were Yugoslavia of fate the over disputes The ü 1996, 20). The federal army intervened to re-establish the control entire the re-establishover control to the intervened The federal army 1996,20). ü 1997, 133-54). 1997, ü 1996,30). 92 The political tensions between the two republics and the and republics two the between tensions political The rd ü of December 1991, only Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, 1991, only of December 1997, 92) 1997, 93 However, one week earlier, Germany hadalready Germany weekearlier, one However, 162 ü as president of the federation had been had federation of the president as CEU eTD Collection enemies of Croatianthe as nation. (Pavkovi Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Croatia from Serbs including victims, their and gestures heroic as portrayed were Ustasha by the committed atrocities of the many Consequently, century. tenth the since uninterrupted was reinterpreted in such away so that it support the historical myththat the Croatianstatehood was determinationwithin Croatia oroutside the borders Serbs. of also historical were Serbia.there whom At the sameamong time, the This periodargumentadversaries, of was Ustasha used by of their Croatian nationalists actions the to refutefrom the right of the Serbiandifferent populationmuch been to self- have not would atrocities war Ustasha the because happened have not should this but treatment this for compensate to means viewpoint of Croatian nationalists, Serbs were given aprivileged status within Croatia during communism as a 95 important part in shaping the EuropeanCommunity position onYugoslavia. remind the fact thatissue-linkages generated by Maastrichtthe treaty negotiations played asignificant recognition of independence for Yugoslavthe EC’s of republics. Cohen (1993) andPavkoviconsequences international and regional the as well as process, the in Community European 94 yearnext following newlocal incidents and bellicose declarations of both Croatian and territory within Croatia was 1990. inAugustproclaimed The conflictescalated during the and place Croats aSerbian and autonomous Serbs between clashes violenttook Several heavily imbued with reminding pro-fascist elements, of Worldthe War II ethnic cleansing. on ofCroatia national independence the became insecure when discourse increasingly the feel More specifically,lands leavinginstate. the SerbianCroatian the started population of unstable an context the within rhetoric nationalist of an increased effect they were the hostilities followed the Slovenian firstincidentswar, the back date from early 1990. Partly, moreHerzegovinaintense from Yugoslavia, weremuch Although and violent. majorthe The following two wars, issue. settle the was convened to that international conference of the to the opinion contrary which were generated andSlovenia, of independence Croatia recognise the to forced European Community the that by the separation aprecedent created decision German the circumstances, Whateverthe 44-7). Caplan 2005, of Croatia and Pavkovi B. 1996,493-5, reunification Bosnia- German in (Crawford the recent important been whichhad particularly principle of self-determination, the parties supported feared most anaffluxof immigrants and ofits (Krieger refugees 1994) and that political it that in region, the significantly invested already been Germany had that are fact the factors havebeenindependence long and debated arestill invoked Amongunclear. the most often The Serbs had been one of the targets of Croatian Ustasha genocide during the Second World War. From the There is an extensive literature on this topic. Most recently,Caplan (2005) elegantly discusses the role of the ü 1997,5-11,92-4, Cohen 1993, 127-9). 163 ü (1997)also usefully ü 1997,149-50, 94 95 CEU eTD Collection (Trgov perceived themselves since the 19 the since themselves perceived territory and consequently as the main threat to the process of building.nationhood of to theprocess main thethreatterritory consequently as and nation and purity tothe Croatian of the asathreat been portrayed had Serbs In Croatia, the project. entire the Yugoslav with in mainly relation wasconceptualized distinctiveness the and toimpose nationhood.wars hadIn Slovenia,been aseparate Croatian attempts partially TheSlovenian more complex. was newconflict cases, the two previous of the characteristics much itof shared Bosnia-Herzegovina. Though the By warhad time, the spreadalso to that Grubisa 1998). mass of exodus Serbian andfinallyrefugees an put end totheUNmission (Weiss 1996, Croatian over army UNprotectedthe areas took with Serbian majority,a whichgenerated the again. Finally, started conflict armed partiesboth asin1993the of moment for respite a just offered the cease-fire However, deals. brokered in EC than the agreement Vance the in much more numerous and more detailed werealso These military arrangements. of terms UNwasmore in the Community. experienced addition, Germany-pressured In European the than neutral more as mission UN the perceived Serbs The successful. been had Council of maintain UNSecurity the to in involvement peace.Initially,“bluehelmets” order the of thousands several deployed andthen cease-fire the monitor to UNsentofficers the after, 97 special envoy former Secretaryspecial CyrusVanceenvoy USState (Pavkovi and the through Nations, by United the were negotiated arrangement of the crisis,the terms the failed of had been European in Community several management already times peaceful the the supervision.Since international cease-fire,under sides agreedto the two reason, military Croatian hadthe reachedgroups for Partially and paramilitary astalemate. this media (Pavkovi of the attention the seeking frequently politicians mainly were which parties, signing by the respected not were 96 (Markovi Serbian leaders Partially, this may have been the result of the fact that within the South Slavonic Previously, over a dozen of cease-fire agreements had been brokered by the European Community but they but Community European the by brokered been had agreements of cease-fire dozen a over Previously, þ evi ü 2003,224-9). ü 1997,152-3). ü 1996, 20-9). By the end of 1991, the Yugoslav federal federal and army of Yugoslav 1991, the By theend 1996,20-9). th century onwards as distinct, both on linguistic and historical grounds historical and linguistic on both distinct, as onwards century 164 ü 1997,143). oikumene , Slovenes had , Slovenes 96 Soon 97 CEU eTD Collection 237, Pavkovi Muslimsand itisconsideredand thestarting point of interethnic violence BosnianSerbs the in war (Cohen between 1993, clashes brutal generated Bosnia-Herzegovina, of independence the for referendum the of day the son’s wedding frontin of a churchSarajevo in by unidentified gunmen. This incident,which took during place 99 although some in had majority the parts of different republic.the religious was one cultural-linguisticor of groups entity.truly None ethnicthe dominant, as nation of notion classic the upon built been have not could distinctiveness whose republic, 1995, 209, PavkoviLittle and Silber 235, 1993, (Cohen Herzegovina Western in numerous more were Croats while Herzegovina, and formedthemselves Yugoslav orof other declared identity.cent 8per and Muslims Croats cent wereper 17 concentratedSerbs, cent the31 per mostly Muslim, were in the cent centre per 44 part of however, the republic Herzegovina, majority 98 in Sarajevo, Serbs were in majority in the north west of Bosnia and in eastern andCroats, between Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Serbs in early 1992. tookplaceof both between the nature, a highly Bosnian and emotional Bosnian Serbs 223-35, Pavkovi Therefore, during the war,Serbs were theof hostilities maintargets Croatian (Cohen 1993, Furthermore, each of the main military forces –Serbian and Croatian, continued to be to continued Croatian, and –Serbian forces each military of main the Furthermore, gangsandethnicmilitias. several against criminal or fight together continued the leftfederal army. per Yet, this 80 centalmost of formerfederalthe in army Bosnia, which wasproclaimedMontenegro, and nativeall citizensits not toBosnia were recalled from the of and Serbia (FRY), composed of Federal the Yugoslavia later, Republic month Serbs. One Bosnia and followingthe independentproclamation of an Republic by Serbian Bosnian the USrecognisedthe April Community independence of European and the 1992 after (Cousens andCater 2001,19). Thefighting broke almost throughout entirethe republicin newrepublic independent asa Bosnia within theseparation or Serbianterritories the of whohadit either alreadydeclaredsupported that the remaining of republicthe inYugoslavia independence (Cohen 1993, 236).This happened theopposition despite of Serbianthe part, republic’s the way to documents the thatopened had adopted leaders Bosnia-Herzegovina of inand Muslim Croat 1991whenthe already becometensed had increasingly situation the Among the most important episodes whose emotional charge was very highwas the killing of a Serb at his In 1991, Slovenians formed almost 90 per cent of Slovenia and Croatians 75 per cent of Croatia. In Bosnia- ü 1997,156). ü ü 1997,48-9). 1997, 133-52). Bosnia-Herzegovina wasamulti-ethnic 1997,133-52). andmulti-religious 165 98 The first major incidents, 99 At political level, political At CEU eTD Collection Herzegovina into two entities, andintotwo Herzegovinacontrolled Croats 51percentbyBosnian Muslims, and Bosnia- allowedof thepartition adocument that adopted conflictin involved the led to the end of war. This was first outlined in September 1995 in Geneva, where the parties 2001, 21-3). Cater and fighting (Cousens the with inparallel place taking negotiations thatwere fragile which underminedbelligerents, of the attacks be the vulnerable to to proved ground the on peacekeepers sent the credibility 1998). At sametime, several the led failed UN peaceplans(Owen1995,Holbrooke the to of theit.end This means to to the respect with causesof consequently war and to the with respect United divided was community international Nations the because happened this Partially, atrocities. war as the of much prevent to peacefailed it but quick, relatively was Bosnia to intervention broker,International as well asbasis for ahealthy economic andpolitical (Cousens development and Cater2001,25). the of the area but alsoleft the country in hard emotional dismay, as well as without much of the demography the changed onlydramatically not weredestroyed.actions Such infrastructures major andhabitation least, transport side.Not incriminate the opposite forged to Croatian war, media was used as a means of propaganda and images or news were frequently place often 1993,238-41).Furthermore,like outsidetook also (Cohen thecamps inthe cleansing andethnic masskillings well as as actions, Similar common. wererather abuse armeddetention all the and created conflict, murder,sexual sides camps inwhich torture been displaced during the war,mainly forced through migration mass or During deportation. half than inhabitants isof Bosnia-Herzegovina,of the million that almost 2 have people, More wasunprecedented. hadbeen affected whichwars, thescale population to two civilian equipment (Nation 1998, Andreopoulos 1998). extent, hundreds of UN peacekeepers andotherthe international personnel (Cousens and Cater 2001,23). To a certain capture100 had been the result of involving in the war without both the appropriate mandate and by supported FRY andCroatia respectively (Pavkovi For instance, after the NATO air strikes over Bosnia in May 1995, Bosnian Serbs took hostage several 100 Yet, the international community helped broker the peace arrangement that arrangement peace the broker helped community international the Yet, 166 ü 1997, 157-69). Unlike 1997,157-69). the previous CEU eTD Collection chances of Central and Eastern European countries were “virtually nil.” “virtually were countries European Eastern and ofCentral chances democratization the that concluded clearly time that at world the throughout democratization of prospects 101 theregime in many respects, Interestingly, werewell advanced. studies democratization the American experiences, andLatin European South the dueto 1980s,particularly endthe of by that the thefact despite alike, anddecision-makers most scholars The process surprised a fundamental of internationalchange system the Ash(Garton 224-6). 1991, Schöpflin 1993, a gradual separation of some of the satellite states from the Soviet sphere interest,of without most for at hoped areausually in occurring the changes the thatpaidmoreto attention those for along rule time. post-totalitarian or prone to totalitarian region the considered voices in uncommon it explicitly field endthe was not well-respected that Cold of the War, ittime entire the did. decadepreceding Throughout thatled revolutionary the the times to atleast the not happen, to at nobody forexpected butalmost many hoped people that events was of one those Europe Eastern and inCentral regimes communist the of The collapse 6.2 The triple transition areahaspartly the locally, remainedunstable. intervention, international with partly managed were crises these Although Macedonia. andinF.Y.R. independent later in already Serbianstate, from independence the 2001 the 1998 in Serbianthe ofKosovo,whoseprovince majority Albanian population claims agreements mark official wars.However, the endof Yugoslav the violencesprang in again a final witharrangement detailed military provisions included. TheseDayton-Paris signalled it of theend was warbut the only weeks later three thethat warring parties adopted military base in document, another more(Ohio), Dayton comprehensive, wassigned. This 49 percentunder Bosnian Serb Control (Cousens andCater 2001,25).In November, at Among the most often quoted examples Huntingtonis (1984), whose otherwise article pertinent onthe 167 101 Many of CEU eTD Collection arrived at the end of its history. (1992), to put forward the idea that humanity may had achieved its finality and therefore, in aHegeliansense, it 104 transitionand scholarship. Though contested and thoroughly debated,Huntington’s typology became a common place in democratization transformations, whichfollowed the two smallerwaves of democratization inSouth Europe and Latinincluding in HuntingtonAmerica. (1991a, 1991b), the notion isused toreferexclusively post-communist the at afterthe overthrownof military regimes, personal dictatorships and/orone-party systems. Sometimes, military Finally,dictatorships. wavethird ofdemocratization a developedfrom 1970suntil mid early the 1990s, swept the globe between democratization of wave the A second Second empires. World War continental and to the 1960s,states successor on and the ruins ofaristocracies feudal fascist states,monarchies, colonies and some 19 early the between First, Huntington(1991a,1991b) putforward ideathe thatinthe last two werecenturies there such three waves. processes is significantly higherthan the numberof countries becoming authoritarian regimes ordictatorships. 103 clustered around the same time(Linz relatively were and Stepan 1996). processes democratization the that fact the to due partly literature the in frequent very is 1990s among the three groups of countries that embarked comparisons uponthe transitions towards democracy betweenNevertheless, 1970 and Asia. East and Europe, Eastern and Central Europe, South America, Latin (2002, esp.186-212) elegantly demonstrates withextensive references democratization tothe processes of may lead to significantly different results when criteria for choosing cases are slightly modified, as Whitehead 102 hasdemocratization been by reformsaiming accompanied economic the atliberalizing political wave, the notably, third withinthe ways. their Most predecessors unlike many in unique been have states European East and Central of processes transition The seemed tobefinallyleading idea of the world development. ideologicala strong rival,Subsequently, coagulated andpolitically democracy without disbanded in earlythe 1990s, thus formally ending the half a century long Cold War. bloc werequickly of security communist the institutions westwards, and economic collapsethe brought they importantly, Most dynamics. international entire the of oftransformation the bipolarwave, system. together with European which form called-thirdand Central the East democratizations so the Rejected predecessors European and South American Latin the of in case the unlike However, by most of ofcases. sets two previous the of those to similar were also transformations and change its members, now openly looking Thedemocratic euphoria of those times was so powerful that prompted some, most notably Fukuyama Awave of democratization isaperiod inwhich the number of countries embarked onto democratization Methodologically, the problem ofcomparing transitions to democracy is, however, a difficult one, which 103 the changes that occurred triggeredcountries aradical in occurred changescommunist the that th century and until the First World War, democracies sprang out of absolutist 168 104 102 CEU eTD Collection the morethe recent Pridham (1994), Linz and Stepan (1996), and Whitehead (1996). external actors see, particularly the classic analysis of O’Donnell, Schmitterand Whitehead (1986), as well as 107 found in Karl and Schmitter(1991),Marks and Diamond (1992), and Linz and Stepan (1996). Eastern Europe Dahrendorfsince (1990) first noticed thischallenge. More in-depth analyses issueof can the be 106 Schmitter and Whitehead 1986). liberalization, while inLatin America the market economy had already well-establisheda tradition(O’Donnell, 105 market. sovereignty sovereignty was activelystatus) by encouraged Germany later by and European the of regime (and changeof in the which notably andSlovenia, Croatia mostrepublics, playactors anindirecttended role. to andmarginal external experiences, democratization Europe Southern and American Latin many to similar However, regimes. communist the of role collapse inthe playeda significant factors external Soon after, all the otherlevel. society civil and governmental at both bloc of Eastern the parts in other reformers communist governments fell. As showed in the previous section, economies. planned at“marketising” institutions andoneaiming intodemocratic structures at – one double post-totalitarian transition transforming in(Tism the GDR regime the change Republic intoFederal German Austriaprecipitated the flooding through citizens German East the for open frontier the let to government Hungarian the of decision in replicated Hungary. weresoon in The half of in1989 introduced first the reformsPoland abandoned Whitehead communism through contagion The political (Pridham 1996). 1994, bloc countries of Eastern the the previous unlike the instance, wavesof democratization, For Europe. inand Eastern Central modeschange regime of the to with respect similarities may noticefrom other one Apartthese, 1991). (Offe regime frozen thecommunist during partly been had that process nation-building incomplete an of remnants problems, nationalist handle namely face deep-rooted to hadto alsoathird challenge, area,thegovernments the For detailed comparisons between the democratization experiences equally from the viewpoint of the role of role of the viewpoint the from equally experiences democratization the between comparisons detailed For and Central to referring scholarship transition and democratization the in conclusion common very a is This By way of comparison, in South Europe, political democratizationfollowed almost a decade latereconomic 105 In this sense, the former communist countries embarked on a simultaneous and ă neanu 1992). All these extraordinary All of fuelledtheconfidence extraordinary events neanu 1992).these 169 107 Exceptions were the Yugoslav were Exceptions the 106 Yet, throughout much of much throughout Yet, CEU eTD Collection science scholarship is henceforth known as known henceforth is scholarship science in acombination political reforms, that from equally through rule authoritarian departed in moments revolutionary process the of communism butboth abandoning countries commonly inmet revolutions weresosignificant. not Poland andHungary also had their elements violent the Czechoslovakia of case the in if even revolution, through regimes their have changed to areconsidered Romania and Germany East Czechoslovakia, sametime, the end of the spectrum, the divorce from dictatorship of Romania and the GDR were violent. At 108 of regime (Kornai an hadauthoritarian features in more the theearly policies1980s, already liberalizing economic and political several introduced had which Hungary, like Some, countries. European East and Central the among many differences were there 1980s of the end at the that may observe regime, one previous the of nature exactthe closerlooks at one Such groupings can be operated also with respect tothe modes of transition democracy.to If disintegration. mainly state through previous the regime from itseparated apartbecause stands seems to Only movements. Yugoslavia negotiations popular and of roundtable combination been a have there cases in their that grounds on together grouped be could Hungary and Bulgaria negotiations partial liberalization and electoral the of (Tismscene through in manner, instance, regime changedfor peaceful the a relatively Czechoslovakia, may be according several grouped to features. InHungary,common and Poland Although each country from splitdictatorship orauthoritarian ruleinauniqueway,some prolongation uncertainty of has a high potential regional of instability (Pridham 1994). the when is, intervention international the likely more the is, aregime of end the contested more namely thatthe had already democratization Southernsuggested, the European Community B.1996,Caplan(Crawford 2005). This issue is discussed in more detail insection 3.2.2.1 of the present chapter. refolution 170 108 This case seems to confirm a finding that (Garton Ash 1991). Not least, Albania, ă neanu 1992).At other the CEU eTD Collection (1997) and Vachudova (2005). 110 109 developed initially as a foreign instrument,policy been rhetoric had that group by astrong level. Doubled atpolitical particularly start hadabetter manyneighbours, more than duringtheir theadvanced of communism regime already been had which Poland, and Republic Czech the Hungary, instance, For transition. of andpaths rhythms different led factors to different elections.These first the of experience most notably the existence of a stronger culture of opposition and civil society, as well as the played factors several other but in confirmedpractice,was partially arole this process, the In counterparts. post-totalitarian the to compared quicker and easier bestates relatively democracy authoritarian the of transition the to that suggested scholarship democratisation muchsuch of 1996).Because the freedomsdifferences, censorship and of (LinzandStepan mix andwith of certain a particular 1950spredecessors than the tendencies nationalist and were Romania moving back increasingly towards totalitarianism,but more with in Incontrast, likeAlbania endof War,1989). the lastdecadebefore Coldthe countries the 1990s, for many of the political leaders of the moment, as well as formost of the population, Mainlyliberalizingreforms foreign themarketand in aimingat investors. attract early the through economies, planned their of transformation a radical experienced countries also European East and Central the institutions, of political democratization the Parallel to levels. external and domestic at both counter to had governments these astigma that remain backward, andsocially of to politically region states the were doomed some that claim to was scholarship, in transition present still and frequent very is which argumentation, of of this The consequence type manner. inadeterministic conceptualised be to started waves of transitions different way,this In the behind. backcenturies be traced region.this the increasinglyafter, perceivedasan organic couldthat was development Soon Among the many such examples, one may see, for instance, the otherwise pertinent analyses of Lewis analyses pertinent otherwise the instance, for may one see, examples, such many the Among creation. Group Visegrád ofthe circumstances the esp. 7, see chapter issue, this on details more For 171 109 they came to be regarded asleaders of be regarded to they came 110 CEU eTD Collection 25). Soviet-typehad of development become obsolete already clearly in 1980s (Ágh the 1998, frequently neglecting the developmentinfrastructure.of This economicstrategy based on the andsocialistcreated states industrial particularly subsidised in industry, giants, heavy while of economy command the that the fact was A major obstacle countries. these of for any that led to its decline, which, retrospectively, he argues, seems to have started already in the 1960s. the in already started have to seems argues, he retrospectively, which, decline, its to led that 112 economic liberalization, either during the authoritarian regime orafter the collapse of a dictatorship. currently accept that the cases ofpolitical democratization from 1970s onwards involve atleast aminimum of analysesof Schmitter O’Donnell and (1986), Przeworski (1991) Przeworski and et al. (2000), most authors influential of the conclusions the following Yet, 1960s. inthe emerged debate the since scholarship science the political democratization of institutions in the processof regime change is still subject of debate in political 111 could countries these much what of strategies, development economic type of different the quality.Within market the Comecon system,absorbed hugeSoviet Due the theirproducts. to poor mediocre or frequently of were they produced goods free the without competition, and After decadesof behaviour economic fortheirautarkic traditional markets the goods. of collapse facewas the hadto states former communist the that Another problem neglected. be largely continued to shortcomings infrastructure whilethe mechanisms wasslow, world of incipientcollapse to re-adaptation freeregimes, communistmarkets this the However,until (Fitzmaurice approach 1998,35-9,Kabele1995,71). service-oriented the the communist countries, such as Hungary and Czechoslovakia, to move towards a more systems. economic democracies were more stable and had a longer lifespan if developed alongside healthy in half 20 placethe second of took the that processes democratization of other the the experience Furthermore, 1995). during communism (Mason livingmuch dreamed so with of Western the standards asequivalent frequently represented hadbeen democracy in imaginary that collective the thefact was such confusion for reasons this seemedtobe equivalentwith K. democracy 1996,99).One(Crawford of majorthe Allen(2001)providesinteresting analysisan Soviet ofthe type ofeconomic development the and factors and market free a towards or reforms liberalization economic between correlation ofthe nature exact The 112 The decrease of the Soviet influence and Comecon role in the area prompted some of in areaprompted role the influence andComecon Soviet the Thedecreaseof 111 Handling the communist economic legacies has not been an easy beentask an easy not has legacies economic communist the Handling 172 th century had shown that, indeed, that, shown had century CEU eTD Collection throughout the entire region(Havlik 1995). distortions,such it is undeniable standards thattheliving Despite dramatically duringdeteriorated earlythe declared. 1990s rarely was which income an sector, private the from a revenue earn to able were companies state for work to used who persons unemployed recently of the some because figures reported the than smaller as well asto the widespread tax evasion. For instance, in many places unemployment might have beenslightly systems changed but also due to the incomplete coverage of the incipient yet extremely volatile private sector, 114 2007). Development and Reconstruction for Bank (European 113 transition. early the caseof striking Economic Studies 1996),with 550%annualthe inflationof inrate 1990Poland most asthe Comparative for Institute (Vienna region the throughout cent per hundreds to tens from 1994). Inflation forchanges andDevelopment Reconstruction also rose Bank (European almost visibly by with both industrial agricultural the sectors 50%, and reflecting20 to such reduced been drastically had countries European and East Central the of GDP transition, the fivein yearsthe of instance, first the For most strikingly. competitive economies towards transition difficulty the of reflect half first 1990s of of the the indicators macro-economic planning industry focus and onheavy feltwere painfully the main area. The throughout Once the communist system of regional economic cooperation broke down, the effects of the actors. locala long free-market a larger timeemergence of class the of financialrelations, withinfor inhibited asthe lackof population, aswell which resources the socio-economic communist of framework paternalistic the within developed aversion risk deep add the also may one quality.To these better been hadof ifthey even anyway markets metallurgicaloffer,such couldnot chemical Westernthe as havebeensold products, or onto 1995, 54). This was, however, just a splash into the ocean just the ocean intothe asplash however, 54). Thisof that problems 1995, complex was, former state companies, while maintaining political control over most of the economy (Ágh the some of privatize to inwas region the adopted countries all that policy choice The first Bank for Reconstruction and Development1994). industrial areas East Germanyof was notuncommonlyand Romania, over 20%(European Many of the macro-economic statistics of the early 1990s are partially distorted because the reporting the because distorted partially are 1990s early ofthe statistics macro-economic the of Many Thisfigure was surpassed only once, 1997, when in Bulgaria’s annual inflation arrivedrate at1,082% 113 Notleast, unemployment, particularly in some 173 114 CEU eTD Collection modelled by Jeffrey Sachs, a Harvard economist (Pavkovi 115 Western world. for also advicein sought European states of actively the Central and East governments the the in ownranks, market their free of themechanisms concerning expertise of professional oppressive regime,whichhad still mobilizing potential.At samethe time, given shortage the vision mostly incoagulated communism during opposition and asaescapistsolution the to bewell-beingWestern world representedaskeeperof keyto the continued to andsuccess,a the discourses, In public employed. also was expertise Western of argument the extent, a of previousthe regimebechangedeconomiclesser not gradually. could but structures To certain and many measures cold macro-economic to was limited of showerstrategy the Inreality,the market. free a Western-modelled and aquickadoption of abandon of past the asadefinitive presented was therapy shock the For instance, theother. or for one preference leadershipnew frequentlylegitimize used political rhetorical several means publicly to the the arguments, economic the beyond reason, this For political. mostly was them between choice the therefore, disadvantages, and advantages significant had strategies both terms, by agradual such affected inflation, In socio-economic as Romania,approach. preferred the gallopingadopted Poland hyperinflation, shock therapy.Countries less Yugoslavia and with measures Forinstance, from very period. beginning the transition the confronted of had drasticbasic introduce implement governments gradual strategies, two reforms or either European East and Central the manage them, to order face. In had to economies transition strategy applied in the early 1990s is often considered to have yielded a slightly morestable yieldedhave a slightly to considered isoften early in1990s the strategy applied shower cold the Retrospectively, choice. policy the mostly to is attributed differentiation the standpoint, economy a political From region. the of transformation economic the differently These shelvedthis reforms affected West,was quickly (Geremek 2006). argument tothe wereassociated when negativetheir consequences wouldhave generated strategies Forinstance, afterfailing to cut hyperinflation, the Yugoslav government applied a“shock therapy” partially 115 However, concerned with the disenchantment effect that thechosen that effect disenchantment with the concerned However, 174 ü 1997,99). CEU eTD Collection ethnic Transylvanian city of Târgu Mure ofTârgu city Transylvanian ethnic multi- ofthe inhabitants Romanians the and Hungarians the between clashes ethnic violent been have there 117 since the early 1980s (Kornai market its 1989). liberalize to started had which Hungary, is point in case A notable economy. service-oriented more 116 Yugoslavia andtheSovietUnion. Czechoslovakia, that federal hadstructure: a states multi-ethnic cases werethe affected most level. The at domestic foundations,both atregional and state the were undermining they framework, institutional existing the contested the area.Sincesuchdemands throughout Especiallyfrequent claims in ofseparatismandhigherautonomy were early the 1990s, communism, partially completedhaddue to their not nation-building processes(Offe 1991). that had been community of challenging sense nationalist the problems. These were handle deep-rooted imposed by from communistthe rule,many new the of facedgovernments ethnic tensions andhad to the previousnotable impact on the foundations of the polity regimethroughouta had thechange region. regime Soonthe after the divorce transformations, economic and political such beyond Finally, and reflectedprevious economic background,the as well as of the political commitment to reform. fact thateconomic these the of much Therefore, performance environment. political and socio-economic the states, of transformation depended not only radical moreinclined consequently towards to the anti-communist andwhich was discourse of the related strongly was economiclegitimacy whose elite an by won been had elections first the countries, policy choiceschange. regime the by hit quickly relatively but and mostly also of the communism andwhich were already the had during regime performed better that were those Yet,40). this mightbe aspurious correlation. The applied countries that ashock therapy interm compared tothose (Fiztmaurice wereintroduced which gradualreforms the 1998, medium on better much average on performed economies respective the such therapies after basis for transition the support forward The economies. to brought evidence viewthis is that However, they were not the only ones that experienced such challenges. For instance, in the early 1990s early in the For instance, challenges. such experienced that ones only the not were they However, a to and reforms liberalizing some to due partly was regime communist the during performance better Their 117 ú . Currently, it is widely accepted that these were not spontaneous not were these that accepted widely is it Currently, . None of these federations survived the end of end of Cold the the survived federations of None these 175 116 In addition, in most of these CEU eTD Collection structures that held them together under the reign of the decaying Soviet Union, most Union, of held Soviet under decaying the structures of reign that the them together beliefs of in the the eliteschange in a charge also is there with when foreign only policy,occurs which isa transformation muchcomplete longera process regime, of a (Gustavsson disappearance 1999).the after pattern of external relations” (Holsti 1982, ix). Although in institutional terms this can take relatively short time 118 processes. nation-building ofunfinished existence the by affected the way in whichformersecret police togainpoliticaladvantages (Dobrincu andVasile 2007). This example shows particularly the weaknessdeveloped exploitedbeen the and during communist regime had and,its after collapse, was of it usedby a part the communities two the between of mistrust a deep Rather state hatred. ethnic deep-rooted reflecting actions institutions within the early periods of regime change changed. can dramatically European states East be further It is under these domestic circumstances6.3 Rethinking foreign policythat inachanging environment the foreign policy strategies of the Central and process. in transition the efforts extra required actions Such staff. professional administration state of mass builda critical to needed states created newly Inavery time, the short and Montenegro. Slovakia, Republics, framework hadbasicbe happened,instance, developed. to state for in This theBaltic the and be (re)written hadto narrative national historical much of the regime, communism Many consolidated. have of them not did history along independence beforeof the andinstitutions had be from national or resulted state created imaginary both to such splits, that many is states the of In underway. still that aprocess frequent, havebeen conflicts lines federate former butterritorial and ethnic Yugoslavia. Newcountries appearedalong during havebeenmade claims acquisitions territorial and the states, federate the between boundaries process. pre-existent the along split the was often Though entire the decade. during intensity The different with continued in 1991and thatstarted violentconflicts a seriesof through Sovietdivisions. As in shown previousthe section, Federal the Republic of Yugoslavia broke Union territorial and followed thepre-existent peaceful was arelatively disintegration process 1993. The in andSlovakiaintonew –theCzechRepublic entities two separated War.Czechoslovakia was partially similar to that of Most often, a change of foreign policy strategy is defined as a “dramatic, wholesale alteration of a nation’s 118 176 With the quick dissolution of the institutional the of dissolution quick the With CEU eTD Collection of the Central and East European foreign policies towards achieving the goal foreign achieving the acquiring of policies goal the towards and EastEuropean of Central the disappointmentwith organization this further,grew which ledan to even stronger orientation in the After failure the of addressing 1991). Yugoslavia CSCE conflicts, the former the Central and East European governments to search for better security (T security alternatives better search for to European governments and East Central European and American pressure, such projects were quickly shelved. werequickly such projects American pressure, European and (Vachudova Kohl 1993, 2001, Piotrowski Rachwaldand 2001).However, underboth main becomes security CSCE the organization Poland, the that Europe proposed of even and like Czechoslovakia West. Some, in mostly the hadbeen that designed architecture security part of European the in important thereform an activeof to part take states M. and Timmins (2000), esp. 86-121. 120 3. Appendix see membership, into a larger119 state, such as the Yugoslav and Soviet republics. For a list of the CSCE (and later OSCE) system. bipolar of the collapse the after soon joined Others Act. Final of Helsinki the led adoption the to that sincethedebates process 2007, 24-38). Many of the Central and East European countries were already members of the (Galbreath bloc communist former the from coming attempts rapprochement the positively Less constrained Curtain. Iron by a legal beyondformer had the started that processes democratisation for the enthusiasm rhetorical or institutionalhigh despite the East, the enlarge to to willing was capableand West the unclear whether necessary institutional thesetheir For 1990sithighly early reform. in reasons, was the reform, and made the fact challenged of Western European goals structures traditional these very the CSCE was This security. European and international of essence very the modified regimes communist the first the collapse of the of Yet, security. structures joiningEuropean Western for the them opted to answer The issue has been fragmentarily discussed in several places. For a useful overview of the topics, see Smith topics, ofthe overview useful a For places. several in discussed fragmentarily been has issue The After1990, theCSCE was joined mainly by those thatentities during the Cold Warbeen had incorporated 177 119 This allowed the Central and East European 120 This forced This the Ę kés CEU eTD Collection technocratic leadership of these states. of these leadership technocratic and political the among Union European the and NATO the between confusion widespread a reflected 2000). Insome of countries ofthe the region such,this label was employed still late 1990s, inthe a fact that member of this system was bureaucratically dubbed as Euro-Atlantic integration (Smith M. and Timmins Europe and the CSCE into a common basket that was labelled frequently the Euro-Atlantic system. Becoming a War put NATO, the European122 Community Serbia’sthat membership started andin 2003and not in 2006when acquired it this name. sometimes severalSerbia remained the legal successorof that state afterthe split of otherthe two republics, itiscommonly considered organizations121 such as the Council of could not orwere not willing to do so, such the Russian Federation or Belarus, had realignto Treaty Organization the European Economic and (NATO) Community. security and economic organizations of Westernthe world, namely within the North Atlantic main the into integration the states remained European and Central of the target important Despite their the Council accession andto Europe of membership, the CSCE most the in 2006. inaccepted in Serbia in organization: 2002, the Bosnia-Herzegovina 2003 and Montenegro andAzerbaidjan in 2001.Finally,by of rest 2006, the Yugoslavthe alsorepublics were smaller Croatia scale. and Russian the Federation joined in 1996, Georgia in Armenia 1999, a muchaccessions butLatvia,to were Thesubsequent Moldova andUkraine. also grouped F.Y.R. Macedonia, Albania, thelotwith admission Slovenia.of wasenlargedin1995, The Slovakia and Romania, Lithuania, weretheCzechRepublic, Estonia, members. These became also European countries andEast Central other of series a In 1993, Bulgaria (1992). followed Hungary, asearlythiswas soon which as byPolandtook step (1991)and 1990. It (Hyde-Priceacquire 1994,243).The first to the membershipof organization this was transition the of governments the states, well fitted it rights, human and values democratic of much respect eager to prove theirIn early 1990s, the With mostCouncil viableoption was focus its the Europe. of on the democratic credentialsSchimmelfennig 2003). to the Western partners membershipWesternmoresolid of (Smith security structures M. and Timmins 2000, Intheearly 1990s, theefforts to redesign thestructures of andEuropean international security Coldthe after only since However, organization. the of member became Montenegro and Serbia of Union the 2003, In 121 178 122 Even those that those Even CEU eTD Collection and possibly to the collapse of the Alliance. ofthe collapse the to possibly and to apply the same strategy. This may have probably led to a more unstable security configurationdemocratize. within Europe In states the earlythese help 1990s, to also however, but goals Kaplandefence suggests,certain the achieve numberonly to not of countriesmeans a was willing (1952) Turkey to join and wasGreece too big incorporate fully democratic states. Granting accessionto Germany Spain(1981), (1955) and butmostly to 124 Romania. with the USSR. However,Iliescu was more inclined to consider that the key issue ofRomania’s thestability was a privileged termsrelationship towards Western the security institutions, mostof notably andNATO WEU (Roman 2005). On otherthe rapprochement clear thea hand, for chances the treaty strengthen also would Community European active increasingly the signed in 1991 withstabilization was the first economic attainablethecircumstances goal. In unclear foreign those USSRunder policy that terms, believed he also strongly assumed Roman that werethe author, collaboration the with withinterview an less in acknowledged As he strategies. than security possible the to respect favourablewith feed-back Western a for waited to Community dating from the 1960s, Romansought first to strengthen the collaborationwith this institutionand Bucharestin (Dobrincu Vasile and 2007).Following along traditionof cooperationthe withEuropean which finally led to the fall of Roman through aviolent upsurge of miners from the Jiu Valley called by Iliescu 123 the of practices the into becomesocialized andto stabilise politically to republics Soviet members as This wasintended tohelplater WarsawPactformera means andthe former the (NACC). Council Cooperation Atlantic North the of assistance only the first offered side NATO. At that time, unable to handleThey expressed a group ofthis unstable wish on several statesAlliance. Atlantic North the with closer relations occasions,get to decided however, were, countries from within, hoping for the an Westerninvitation to join moststraightforward. By democratising 1991, not democratisation was path towards the ranks of despitegovernments, signalling Romania’sbreak-up theviolent factthat, the past, with the Western many with relations the on impact diplomatic it hadbut adistressing abandoned USSR. the with atreaty signed even NATO and the towards hesitations initial also had experience, government, an unstable mixneo-communists of much and reformers without governing similar path (Vachudova 1993,Reisch first1993). The post-communist Romanian a totake somehis neighbours of andsuggested theNATOit alternative chose chancelleries, neutrality. However, after the proposal was receivedleast without in the early 1990s. any Hungary, forenthusiasm instance, initially would in have likedthe to opt Western for their foreign policy goals according to these tendencies. This choice was not always clear, at Kaplan(2001) interestingly that,reminds through the previous enlargements, Alliancethe did not Iliescu, Ion President and Roman Petre Minister Prime between disagreements main the of one was This 123 After the dissolution of the Soviet Union several months later, this treaty was this treaty later, months Union several Soviet of the After thedissolution 179 124 CEU eTD Collection both the reluctance to accept new members and the difficulty to design the space of Euro- of space design the to difficulty the members and new accept to reluctance the both reflecting convoluted, was equally The enlargement the organization. to accession for the option. Poland, member the states of finallyNATO toconsider had agreed as a enlargement viable and Hungary Republic, Czech the of notably most governments, European Eastern and distant future. so notjoin in as a Alliance the to aninvitation by states partner bethe soon interpreted to (Smith M. and Timmins beyond andoffering butgoingconference approach NACC the theof seminar membership 2000, 35).without However,partners, their and countries NATO the between interoperability mostly frommeant a political pointthreats of view, forthe PfPany wasof Alliancethehavesecurity eventuality of inthe the consultations with andbodies to of NATO PfP states or NATO both political military to states andto participate partner the The program allowed (PfP). members. From a forPeace of Partnerships Thisin design the forthe came thearea. with was needed1994, military point of view,instability was within growing Europe higher. better security Consequently, a arrangement this former USSR, of many the Balkans and overthe parts quickly wasspreading violence building As in by state larger processthe of of generated political disintegration the entities 200). space 2001, former(Kaplan Soviet andthe within especially andEastern Europe Central Council, insufficientaddress proved to security complex the issues were(re)emergingthat in NATO’s future was a key topic in the U.S. foreign politics (Smith M. and Timminsmay 2000, 35-41). have been the127 fact that accountinto political and security developments in thewhole of Europe” (NATOthe 1994). EuropeanNATO expansion that would reachto democratic states to our East, as part of evolutionaryUnionan process, taking PfP invitation. Mostwas importantly from this point of view, making the document stated, “we expect andwould welcome a similar126 movereform of NATOthe within the new security environment (Mattox 2001,17-8). and the fact125 that the issue of Alliance. Other factors may have played a significant role in the decision to enlarge. Among these, the most important most the these, Among enlarge. to decision the in role significant a played have may factors Other The Central and East Europeangovernments could easily base their interpretationonthe official text of the At the same time, the NACC, which initiated in aproposal of the U.S. administration, was part of the larger 127 125 Within this context, the PfP have increasingly transformed into a preparatory class a preparatory into transformed increasingly have PfP the context, this Within However, the NACC, currently known as the European Atlantic Partnership Atlantic European the as known currently NACC, the However, 126 In the second half of the 1990s, under the concerted pressures of the Central 180 CEU eTD Collection (2000, 125-7). 129 of the forreasons which only statesthree were admitted in 1999, see Gheciu (2005, esp. 70-6). that atleast one Baltic state should be also admitted (Smith M. and Timmins 2000, 47-8). Fora good overview 128 countries aswell. of other inclusion for the pressured several intheyearprecedingNATO states although accession their inThe first 1999,saw one, Poland Republic,Hungaryand members, become only Czech the place The process stages. Atlantic security took within context. newinternational intwo the Central and East European states to do so were Poland and Hungary. Consequently, the first the Consequently, Hungary. and Poland were so do to states European East and Central With(Hyde-Price 1994,229). first the negotiations, and 1989elections their roundtable marketshould European Western Commission aid andthatthe it receive would coordinate communistwere embarking bloc that a onto reform towards process democracy freeand of all the countries and that haddecided government heads ofstate participant year,the already in Paristhe 1989.At place of summit took Group Seven the of (G7) that inJuly that in War, aftermath Second World the of Western Europe reconstruction of the aimed that Plan Marshall the comparedwith often initiative This, Phare program. time was the aid for economic reconstruction developmentand of the civil society, under the that at designed states communist former the and EU the between link institutional important Another countries. communist former the of most with concluded been have Agreements, Accordingly, in the its associates. first become to thepossibility states European andEast Central the offered half of thefirst it system, 1990s, security European the of reform overall the of a series context the within ambitions of arrangements, known with Confronted process a deepreform andenlargement. manifesting higher political as the Europe its to with respect hesitant wassimilarly Community European In theearly 1990s, the Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia joined NATO. for furthercommitted extension of andfive organization the years Bulgaria, later Estonia, For a brief overview of the idea the supported actively pros Denmark while Slovenia, for Italy Romania, for lobbied andinstance, for France, cons of such comparison see, for instance, Smith M. and Timmins 128 Partially due to such insistence, the Alliance such insistence, the dueto Partially 181 129 wascrafted CEU eTD Collection transformation, partially generated by the collapse of the bipolar system. The end of the Cold of a into process was that complex caught itself environment in aninternational place weretaking European states East and Central the foreign of policy in the changes All these transition towards democracy is usually considered to have reached a formal end. in in andRomania theWith 2004,whileorganization Bulgaria acceded to 2007. the this, membership acquired Balticthe countries of rest andthe Slovakia with 1997 wasextended two the to place,of accession group the wereinitiallywhenfirst took In 2004, formed. the that groups identical not was sessions enlargement two the of composition final the NATO, of case inthe unlike waves. Yet, in two place took also space communist theformer towards followed.like Consequently,in NATO, caseof the the enlargementof Union European the negotiations for purpose.In1999, Bulgaria,Latvia, Lithuania, this Romania and Slovakia join andstarted invitedSlovenia to and were Hungary,Czech Poland Estonia, Republic, the yearsmembership. later, Four for EU thecriteria established that inCouncil Copenhagen Schimmelfennig 2003). been anantechamber NATOthe membership to (Smith M. and Timmins 2000, has PfP the in which way tothe similarly becameso, quickly Phareprogram the lesser extent a and Agreements to Union, European the Europe to accession preparing for the framework be a to designed not Although scope. and goals in both extended was it example, their fulfilment of the criteria thatrequires formally organizations define these to stable democracies accession the because and functionalmainly free membership, EU and markets. NATO the acquired they once democracy of phase consolidation the into passed having as regarded largely are countries European East register asignificant change for the first year of EU or NATO membership of these states. Yet, the Central and 132 agreements. Europe ofthe context the within own its as goal such endorse Wallace (2000) argued that, while acknowledging these countries’ aimformembership, Community the did not usually considered afirst step towards full membership (Schimmelfennig 2003, 75). Recently, Sedelmeierand for membership. room Thiswaiting interpretation a as wasperceived basedwidely partially been on the have viewstates that associationEuropean East to and an organization Central the is for designed Community 131 130 them, to aidwas addressed program The democracy and economic freedom indexes, such as those produced by the Freedom House, do not do House, Freedom the by produced those as such indexes, freedom economic and democracy The Under Recovery). Economic for Aid theHungary (Poland Phare – acronym program’s by the reflected is fact The influence of EU law scholarship on the issue, the association agreements that the European 131 This hadbecome clearalready in 1993,with European the 130 but when other communist countries soon followed 182 132 CEU eTD Collection organization of the current international system. international current the of organization into also survival but leadingthe the security of its transformation regional NATO not only allowed of dimension this existence the andGermany, notably most US,France the members, its of commitment political the with Together be resurrected. could that dimension they never ceased to exist. In the aftermath of the bipolar system’s collapse, it was this defence partnership but aimed at providing the security butaimeddefence atproviding partnership basis for security the a “whole andfree” Europe art.5). Asit1949, early was no 1991,theAlliancelongeras mere acknowledged that a (NATO against amemberstate aggression of react provide the means to the mission was to traditional Its and security. freedom ofdemocracy, theconcepts around mainly mission the Although emphasis). author’s 34, liberal Western and values norms democratic within Euro-Atlantic area”(Gheciuthe 2005, military threat, but also [an] institution aimed at countering the usefuloverview of the main arguments on topic, the see Smith M.and Timmins (2000). 133 and an as Gheciu (2005)elegantly out,NATOhaspoints had eversince its both creation an policy-making areaorwithin more scholarly (Kaplan environments 2001, 1999).However, in either the its disappearance arguing for hearvoices to uncommon not itearly was 1990s, Without its main ideological enemy, NATO’s survival notseem did very In probable. the disappearance of the Coldthe Warlogic system andits subsequent international of relations. by degree largest the to affected was Organization Atlantic Treaty North the of The rationale in ideological the which engulfed worldconfrontation the foralmost was half a century. environmentwas mostly feltwithin organizations those thathadleading played roles during international new the to adapt to need The organizations. international important most the strategies but triggered also significantinstitutional orstimulated changes many within of foreign policy states’ formerof the communist reorientation the notWarallowed only The role of the member states in redefining the role of the organization has been widely discussed. For a For discussed. widely been has organization the of role the redefining in states member of the role The inside dimension. NATO was not only notonly dimension.a “conventional alliance was against NATO Soviet the inside aspects were aspects less visible during the ColdWar, 183 133 Accordingly, NATO redefined its Accordingly, redefined NATO inside risk of potential loss of loss potential of risk outside inside CEU eTD Collection case of Bosnia and Kosovo missions. Kosovo and Bosnia of case Alliance can legally by-passtaking action.ForSmithM. and Timmins (2000, 116)this reference is, however, not very biding as the the UN through This themay suggest that provisionsforfuture out-of-area missions, NATO would specifically ofwait fora UNthe mandate beforeart. 4 of 137 the NATO treaty, likesecurity of any of partiesthe is threatened.”it did in the consult togetherwhenever, in the opinion of ay of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or 136 eastern Europe” (NATO 1991). difficulties, including ethnic rivalries and territorial disputes, which faced are political bymany incentraland countries and social economic, serious from may arise that instabilities of consequences adverse the from rather “Risks to Allied security are less likely to result from calculated aggression against the territory of the allies butmaintaining stability in Europe by countering the instability that was growing in Central and Eastern Europe: 135 2001). idea of democratizationrhetoricalas itsmain conceptthe post-ColdenvironmentWar in (Bozo Brenner 2001, 134 (NATO 1991). Western Balkans and Afghanistan. in the forinstance member states, of the territory act the outside allowed to NATO that ashiftmanagement of itself arrangement, brand paradigm as organization could a conflict Alliance. of ofinsecurity the members for the source become the main had risks nonconventional while likely, less was aggression overt context, international increasingly robust, the exact nature and legitimacy new andlegitimacy exact international the nature NATO within of the increasingly robust, is missions such of justification legal the if even However, diminish. to likely not is Gardner 2001).Therefore,farfrom being anexception, trend the of out-of-areamissionsthe already withcollaborated UNonthesethe in grounds Yugoslav the wars (Granatstein 2001, respect. inhelp this UN the andcapable to willing NATO was butemphasized factthat the security acknowledged primacy the of Unitedthe in Nations maintaining international peace and principles, NATO the of modification major last isthe which concept, strategic prevention management, crisisincluding[and] crisis response operations” The(ibid.). 1999 “effectivecontribute conflict to namely mission,to new organization a acquired addition, the members(NATO1999).In for Alliance andits the main security threat reconfirmed as The link is explicit through reference to art.7 of the NATO treaty, which acknowledges the role of the UN. of the role the acknowledges which treaty, NATO the of art.7 to reference through explicit is link The Inlegal terms, this was justified mainly through art.4 of NATOthe treaty, whichstates, “the parties will Interestingly, atthat time, conflicts were identified spatially rather precisely. NATO was interested in This partially reflected theUS visiononthe issue, whose administration had already started promoting the 137 In fact, by the time when this objective became a legal provision, the Alliance had Alliance the legal becamea provision, Infact, bythetimeobjective this when 134 The new strategic concept emphasized the fact that, withinthenew that, fact the emphasized concept Thenewstrategic 136 In the late 1990s, nonconventional In the were risks the 184 135 Therefore, the Therefore, CEU eTD Collection Nations. In the early 1990s, after along time marginalisation,of the UN seemed finally beto United the of efficiency the way similar in a affected design legal and institutional The 44). 2007, its (Galbreath actions of andcontinuity coherence the impaired often has of staff, replacement frequent relatively and its on focus decentralization within theorganization and on ground. However,the institutional the design of OSCE, with both player a key became Minorities National on Commissioner High its involved, it which in andconflicts of crises ofmostthe character inter-ethnic the Given stalled transitions. or for enforcing and by support inthe provide institutions affected democratic regions conflicts missions establish monitoring to has the first been space.It usually communist of former the areas conflict the of many of management international in the role leading a itself for build Organizationmid-1990s, the for in Security (OSCE) managedand Co-operation Europe to in of transition the Euro-Atlanticthe states area(CSCE1990,1992a, 1992b,1994).Since the buildingconfidence of and security measuresand thesupport andhuman rights democracy promotion of the whose maingoals are (OSCE) in Europe Security and Co-operation morefully-fledgedintoinstitutionalised for a organization andtransformed – Organization becameit its future, upon of period reflection a after these reasons, For Warner 2004). and Sabahi 18-20, 2005, of (Caplan crises the prevent escalation the manage to not CSCE did issues, tothese response quick had arelatively it although that, fact the from particularly viewpoint the from critical werethemost crises andtransnational freemarket, and democracy of the towards transition of processes difficult states, of collapse the Among these, challenges. CSCE concerns it in of majorwas facing ColdWar.Like NATO, aftermath the the reform process (Galbreath The for Security Conference in was andinto Co-operation Europe asignificantalso caught 2007,is thatis still underway. aprocess reform Alliance of the 42).2001).Forare still environment this unclear (Stuart conceptual institutional reason,the and Above all, the worries came 185 CEU eTD Collection regional and “great power” conflict management (Hansen, Ramsbotham, and Woodhouse 2004). Woodhouse and Ramsbotham, (Hansen, management conflict power” “great and regional with form) classic and limited their in (except actions UNpeacekeeping of the replacement the preached even 139 expressed. are factors 1998). Frommost important are (in)securitythe which perceptions, inequality,among private interests and this (Buzan, Wæver,factors, de Wilde and concurrent of several result the viewpoint, considered are conflicts however, Currently, 2006). the the majority of contemporary conflictswouldethnic be ethnic conflicts was widely spread (Coackley 1993, Wolff element forlatent periodslong (Holsti1996, Kaldor1999). this For reason, atthebeginning 1990s, of the idea the that should be138 understood rather as a form through which these were spreading newin that aftermath of type Coldthe War.conflicts of the managing for the inappropriate was often ofits mandate peacekeepers the on ground, the the intervention in the cases in which crises escalated. Furthermore, when the UN intervened within the Security frequently hinderedCouncil, the conflict prevention andefforts delayed decision reachinga of difficulty the particularly organization, the within making process decision- convoluted the However, international arena. within the major actor stable and more the as Nations United the regarded community international the system, bipolar by the generated been had that institutions security the of future the concerning uncertainty high of able toplay fully its role inmaintaining international peace and security. Within context the any previous cooperative arrangement in modern succeededany Community European arrangement cooperative the times, previous European and world before already affairs the collapseof unlike bipolarthe First, system. War,Cold had European the beenincreasingly Community role an acquiring important in emerging the of context the within economies of harmonization the through security Western making, namely European Union. initiallythe mainly Although a projectof strengthening foreign leader emergence of experiencedpolicy and the international inEuropean a new also community international the divide, ideological East-West the of dissolution the After preferred to act through regional organizations and alliances, such as the NATO. while increasingly memberensuring the peaceandsecurity diminished, states drastically throughout the world. why partially inhumanitarian UNfailedpreventseveral catastrophes early the 1990s, the to Consequently, the confidence in the capacities of the UN to act for In the mid 1990s, the confidence in the United Nations’ capacities had reached such a low point that many that point a low such reached had capacities Nations’ United the in confidence the 1990s, mid the In Many of the new conflicts are low-intensity and frequently correlate with ethnic tensions that had been 186 139 138 This is This CEU eTD Collection threats and the values concerned, there are, however, historical differences. historical however, are, there concerned, values the and threats an absence of fearthe that such values may be attacked (Wolfers 1962, 150). When it comes to the object of 140 Copenhagen, security in School of theso-called of his and colleague work Buzan Barry influential Following the conflicts. modern of complexity the better andexplain address Williams had 1997).Thisvision been challenged in needthe already 1980s the due to to Krause Waltand 1991, 1979, aggression (Waltz forces deterrent and military presence of the through interest national of protection the to mainly referred security War, Cold the security flexible approach. byamore was replaced and comprehensive institutional level conceptualbutalso at importantly, one. Most traditional the of concept only at place taking not were arena international the within least, transformations these Not allowed the Union increase its to international visibility and leverage. and processes, international events major in EU presence of anincreased with together and, external relations to related inmatters states Union European the to voice common a gave mechanism CFSP the leadership, EU the among divisive still are issues many and break-up. Although foreignthe policy has creation remained largely of national competence shortcomings of deceivingtheir rather during firststagesof teamwork the Yugoslav the created a CommonWestern European leaders pushto their cooperation at a further level. Mostimportantly, they allowed context, international Foreign changing the as well as reform, This in 1993. Union European the into and Community European the of transformation the to lead Securitywould others, among which, Policysince midthe the 1980s organization upon an embarked extensive institutional reform, (CFSP), process, this to parallel In trade. international in actor leading a into Community European partially member the mostthis transformed states, of economies with strong Coupled institution. the as an answer toasupranational their rights butdelegated competences having national longerwere no to thein having a common commercial policy. This meant that in terms of trade, the member states Irrespective of the historical period, security may be defined as an absence of threats to certain values and as and values certain to threats of absence an as be defined may security period, historical ofthe Irrespective 187 140 Until the end of CEU eTD Collection complex ethnic conflicts has generated high pressure for significant transformation within for transformation significant high pressure hasgenerated conflicts complex ethnic frozen during the Cold War.Beyond thequestion of regional instability, case this of andlegitimacy,mostly statehood to related questions significant federation raised Yugoslav of followedthe dissolution that the Balkan the crises level. even Particularly, deeper an at security system of international challengedthe existing and Europe Eastern of Central renounce at the monopoly they once had in thisfield. Indirectly, some of the regime changes had to forces military and whilestates in sector, security the new actors of acceptance this ledtothe Amongpractices. security much others, of current haspermeated civilians for problems of the interest a greater importantly, Most security. of practice in changes the Human Security approach was not only at conceptual level butyielded also significant (United Nations DevelopmentProgram normative1994). The by brought transformation the basis a daily humans on affect these and ofinsecurity common more instance,causes are for repression, and criminality epidemics, Hunger, suchas war. events fear the of cataclysmic by necessarily insecurity not istriggered for of majority ideathe people, that, the expressed of new within Program.framework Unitedthe This concept Development Nations the on security was the emergence and promotion of the concept of Human Security, mostly traditionalview challenge tothe mostimportant Yet, the al. 1993). et (Wæver identity terms in security idea security state while interms, the societal is mainly that sovereignty defined was A firstimagine step to nationalsocietal opposed security to as security, byadvancing an paradigm to even economic,shift.contributed greater andsecurity societal environmental on discussions system, bipolar of the collapse Afterthe threats. of security main object asthe be perceived to continued becausestates mainly system, security of international the even1998). However, thisnew nationalin still perspective interestrefined, theplaced centre economics, society Buzan,Wæver,(Buzan 1983,1991, and environment and deWilde became describedinterdependent -military, tofive along distinctsectors but politics, 188 CEU eTD Collection knot. war in Kosovo (1999)and the subsequentissues of secession. Thisis a yetuncut Gordian with the international community the sensitive for became increasingly Security concept, state sovereignty the and doctrine rights fundamental the between tensions the doctrine, specifically, More sovereignty. which have been furthered one of underlyingthe of principles inworldmodern order times, viz.the concept the of with the development of the Human 189 CEU eTD Collection DYNAMICS IN CENTRAL OF REGIONAL AND PART 190 EASTERN III COHESIVENESS EUROPE CEU eTD Collection sections correspond to each one. to correspond sections major logics and waves may one identify three However, date. their creation account into taking chronological, of internationalmostly is initiatives intergovernmental regional the of examination The incidental. regionalism rather are after the of collaboration forms links with previous in whose area the typephenomenon of political end of the Cold War. new isThree a thatpost-communistregionalism which demonstrates inthis chapter, are presented cooperation regional puzzlingof process of this Thefactual details regional arrangements. have regimes, these communiststates andinvolved established in number of a noticeable the fall of the since Yet, unlikely. seemed countries European andEastern Central the between collaboration significant circumstances, Under such area. of the nation-states the level symbolic at consolidating of process the in competition of form a was identity regional producing also viablepolitical projects of regionalcooperation at a certainlevel. To extent, before Cold War wererarely developedthe at aimed regional identity argued that projections 5,Ialso muchgenerate chapter In cooperation. positive thearea,whichdidnot within in Union.European 4, Asshown ahistorycamethis after chapter deep political of tensions integration the was finality intended whose strategy policy foreign aWestern oriented chose countries in Westerncommunist former most in which context political the outlined chapter previous The institutions, such as the NATO, the Council of Europe and the IN T F C ROM UNCERTAINTY TO NORMALITY TO UNCERTAINTY ROM HE DEVELOPMENT OF HAPTER C ENTRAL AND ENTRAL 7 E ASTERN P OST E UROPE C OLD : W 191 AR INTERNATIONAL REGIONALISM CEU eTD Collection Particularly technical, bilateral or small-scale arrangements that involved partners from thatinvolved partners bilateral small-scale arrangements or Particularly technical, curtain. Iron the of dismantling the with disappeared involved had been countries communist former the which in cooperation of configurations or forms all not However, time. atthat region swept the that change” “windof the evenYugoslav republics, not Balkan promising the cooperation of late1980scouldthe resist inthe crisis the of outbreak the With countries. these of liberation theexternal expressing for choice natural wasthe and Comecon the WarsawPact of USSR-led the dissolution the democratization, internal of aprocess toembark upon become able had satellites former that extent tothe influencethe Soviet decreased 1990s,the 1980sandlate early inWhen,half inin consolidation the1950s. of the ofthe second Sovietpower area, the War such theSecond projects, as Balkanandthe BalkanPact federation, vanishedwith the Cold early few The them. created that regimes the survive not did communism of constraints support oravoid the initiatives built areato in the intergovernmental regional dissertation, of the part inshown previous the Asalready chapter. aclosed seemed bloc communist the within fivedecades in previous the thathaddeveloped states European andEastern Central the among level regional at interaction multilateral the War, Cold the of end the At 7.1.1 The Central European Initiative evolution. in their stages major emerged,aswellthe ColdWarfirstinpost arrangements which these circumstances the presents Thissection regionalism.” first wave“reshuffle this Icall security reconfigurations, the collapse of the communist regimes and the end of the Cold War. Since itis the product of by brought in changes of the context the participants the of security ensure the needthe to to documents founding in their reference the is in common have all what relation, temporal this Beyond 1990s. the of half first the in emerged initiatives regional of bulk A first 7.1 The quest forsecurity 192 CEU eTD Collection 2005, Switzerland) (Alps-Adriatic Working Community 2004, 2005, 2006a, Appendix 1b.2, 2006b). Sopron/Györ-Moson-Sopron(1988-2006, Hungary), Emilia-Romagna (1994-2005, Italy) andTicino (1997- had beenmembers: Bavaria (1988-2005,Germany), Trentino-South Tyrol (1981-2005, Italy),Györ- Julia Venetia, Lombardy, Veneto), as well asCroatia and Slovenia. Previously, five other adminstrative units Austria Styria),and fourcounties Hungary from (Baranya,Somogy, Zala), Vas and three Italian regions (Friuli 142 as active observers (Alps-Adriatic Working Community 1978, 2004). Slovenia (S.F.R. Yugoslavia). The landsof Bavaria (F.R. Germany), the Friuli-Veneziaregions Giuliaof and Veneto Bavaria (Italy),as well as Croatia and and Salzburg were not full members 141 and participated only out, particularly during the 1990s(Alps-Adriatic Working Community 2004, 2005, Among them, administrative the units ofAustria and Hungary frequently singled themselves fivethese as countries beingthemost active in initiating and projects. of terms coordinating of indicates present representatives the 1978to since and programs initiatives of AAWC the Croatia andSlovenia2006b).The Working (Alps-Adriatic Community 2004, 2005, review as well as Austria,and Hungary, Italy from units administrative latethe 1980s,respectively remainedsamesince the group the core in active participation, West, of terms the towards 1978, art.3). Working Community (Alps-Adriatic in scientific facilities area the betweenpromoting andheritage, cultural relations favour cultural contacts tourism, and preserving developing infrastructure, natural andprotecting trans-Alpine resources, withAustria, Federal Socialist and Italy the of created Yugoslavia of purpose the Republic framework for collaboration sub-nationalof or sub-federal administrative territories from notable case in point is the Alps-Adriatic Working Community (AAWC). Initially, thisA was a context. regional and international new the in also exist to continued Europe Western Adriatic Working Community Appendix2005, 2006a, 1b.2). and, in the 1990s, the Swiss 1980s late since member initiative asfull tothe also land participated German of Bavaria canton of Ticino joinedfirst asobserverslater asfull and members (Alps-Adriatic Working Community 2004). The the AAWC for a short periodforward byAAWC, inthe put projects became interested counties 1980s, several Hungarian (Alps- Thecurrent members of AAWC the (2007) arefour landsfrom Austria (Burgenland, Carinthia, Upper Thefounding members were lands the of Carinthia, UpperAustria, Salzburg andStyria(Austria), landthe 193 142 Despite such extensions such Despite 141 In the mid the In CEU eTD Collection local level cooperation for the Quadrilateral. The only time the Alpine-Adriatic scheme is scheme Alpine-Adriatic the time only The Quadrilateral. the for cooperation level local is of relevance the the in there anyreferenceto However, nowhere document 1989a). the and friendly relations, including the bridge-building role of the national minorities” (CEI amongfour countries the“on establishedrelays levelhigh already the of good-neighbourly specifically cooperation mentionsthe that The text thesecond view. supports initiative the of foundingdeclaration The 2006). (Jeszenszky Quadrilateral couldhave inspiredthe initiative administrative small the that possibility the about out found had he topic the on that time about the activities of the AAWC, only later and mostly from academic literature Minister of Foreign Affairsformer Hungarian author, the with interview an Géza In Quadrilateral. the project, political Jeszenszky new even agenuinely of creation the reckonedfavouring factor a than more been not have to thatseem AAWC although he was aware at Quadrilateralconsider thattheAlps-AdriaticWorking Community was pointof startingthe the Cooperation.one hand, scholarly such studies, Reischas (1993),Bunce (1997)and Cviicusually (1999), On On the of the isdebate. a subject still Quadrilateral the AAWCand linkbetween the The exact other hand, the as better known for officials involved in the process the official documents. Danube-AdriaGroup as an alternative labelbutthis name did survivenot itwas and almost neverused in 144 organizationwas officially established in Klagenfurt, Austria (Alps-Adriatic Working Community 2006a). 143 called the framework, cooperation cultural and scientific representatives four a political, countries of these established inBudapest economic, links ata more politically level.thisFor weighted reason,in November1989,the upgradeHungary, their Republic of Yugoslavia decidedFederal to Socialistand the Italy within the contextof international regional rapidly the changing environment,Austria,and 2006b). Referencing German, Hungarian and Italian newspapers of the period, Reisch (1993) also indicates the indicates also (1993) Reisch period, ofthe newspapers Italian and Hungarian German, Referencing of the Secretariat General the AAWC, of the development the to contribution Austrian the acknowledge To 143 In 1989, possibly on the background of local of scheme, theas well Inbackground cooperation this on as 1989, possibly Quadrilateral (CEI 1989a, (CEI 1989b). 194 144 Initiative of Four Integration Initiative of but CEU eTD Collection to indicate the fact that the initiative explicitly intended to help Hungary and Yugoslavia and Hungary help to intended explicitly initiative the that fact the indicate to 1989a). Yet, according toapart of the scholarship, the political declarations of the time seem already achieved” (CEI its develop“deepen results and to need Helsinki process the to the to only refer documents official The 1993). (Reisch chancelleries most for experiences yet butrather overwhelming certitudes Warlogic Coldwerenot of the disappearance and bipolarity the of the collapse created, was Quadrilateral the timeat the Furthermore, country. a was still Yugoslavia communist its whileS.F.R. middle of transformation, regime Western inthe Hungary was democracies; Austriawere two andItaly November 1989, Quadrilateral a clearly was not product buta hybridpost-communist In arrangement. straightforward.may cooperation,not It beargued is question this primacy thatof the regional form other Quadrilateral of the ispost-communist preceded any certain that be inCentral developed and from Eastern Although Europe. a chronologicalof point view it was firstthe regional intergovernmental scheme cooperation of post-communistthe period to initiative is this theQuadrilateral whether to creation of the related issue debatable Another (Fitzmaurice 1993,395). developed the1970sprovinces since from Austria,among autonomous Germany and Italy that cooperation sub-regional of administrative a trend of AAWCwaspart the Rather, Quadrilateral. the generated that Wardiscourse post-Cold tothe related slightly fact only in is AAWC In largerperspective, a regional itsmorethan predecessor. asacatalyst considered institutionally affected creationthe through Quadrilateral,the itcouldof indeed be was not that organization exist independent asan AAWC to continues since the creation of the Quadrilateral is never even suggested in any of the official texts. official the of in any suggested even is never Quadrilateral of the creation importance of the subregional cooperationis also emphasized several times in the document, yet itsrole inthe forms of regional co-operationsuch as the Alps-Adria Working Community others”and (CEI 1989a). The 145 other futuretypes of cooperation existing or amongfounding the countries. of development in the assigned was Quadrilateral the role the of context in the is mentioned “By strengthening relations among themselves four the countries wish tocontribute to successthe ofvarious 195 145 Furthermore, CEU eTD Collection to security, briefly presented in the previous chapter. previous in the presented briefly security, to cooperation and not throughmilitary actions (Cima 1992, 182). This reflects theshift of paradigm with respect Eastern blocs. Its novelty stayed inits approach, as it was expected that security be achieved through economic 146 rather non-politically oriented scheme of cooperation.a reflect openly they explicit, more made are goals these when Furthermore, world. Western politicalapproach to change so inCentral widespread and Eastern Europe inin the 1980s the cautionary and from gradualist the acleardeparture as inanyway be cannot interpreted and strengthen to jointresponsibility for thefuture of (ibid.).Europe” Suchdeclarations Europe, of unity greater of process promote the to wished] member countries [the initiatives “by CSCE.” In addition, makingwidening co-operation among and themselves constructive newfurtherimproving way to and the atmosphereinEurope strengthening theof process economic(CEI 1989a).Its first structures important andmostgoal was to“contribute in a and newthe help to Europe countries into participantintegrate the European the political and playAccording the founding therole Quadrilateral asignificant to documents, aimed to in this of support view. cooperative andscope countries.the The further scheme goals communist and Western thesatellite between logicthe of cooperation post-Helsinki the from much diverged not did initiative Quadrilateral the of logic the period, communist post- in the first the beconsidered may it viewpoint chronological a from although In short, War order. Cold the of thechange concerning statement political significant puttingforward a approach,without suggest aprecautious arewritten declarations terms in the in involved thefounding some of political leaders which negotiations, the the in the region inand (Rupnik A. Europe 2002,Bunce1997).Even if wasthis intention the of were taking radicalchanges place in intoof Westernthe that context world the the integrate (CEI 1989a). The Quadrilateral did not have much time to fulfil its goals as it was soon as fulfil its goals have to much time not did The Quadrilateral 1989a). (CEI serious challenges to thecollaboration mostly low-key are such and culture whichones, as transport, not raisedo political and security establishment on the short and medium run However, in the early 1990s, the project was regarded as a security buffer zone between the Western and the and Western the between zone buffer security a as regarded was project the 1990s, early the in However, 196 146 Infact,thefields of proposed CEU eTD Collection has developed inhas developed formerthe space. communist Montenegro. of Republic the of admission the with eighteen at arrived countries participant membership2000). The last place extension in of CEItook the 2006, when numberof the armed conflictsand in ethnic crises itwhich had been involved 1998,1999, (CEI1992c, Yugoslavia CEIafterpurposefully delayed duetothe to the havingbeen 2000, wasadmitted they had been periodobservers for ashort (CEI 1992b, 1994a,1994b, 1996a,1996b). In Albania, Belarus,Romania, Bulgaria, Moldova, acquiredfull Ukraine and membershipafter Republic of Macedonia joined initiative the (CEI1993b).Threeyears later, in 1996, The same Yugoslav inremain yeartheFormer 1993a, 1993b). theorganization (CEI to Slovakia chose both and CzechRepublic the indissolution 1993, of Czechoslovakia tripling the number of numbersmembership.fact, among In arrangements it the post-communistdidat thelargest scale, so in its almost one its time several alsoexpanded has andInitiative European Central the creation, Since its a half decade of existence.fields major education arrangement,with of and economy,as oriented culture collaboration. After the a policy- mainly remained (CEI) Initiative European Central the its predecessors, Like 1992b). arrangement, the to membership their confirmed republics former its of three only and entity international an as than previous.the In1992,when Socialistthe Federal Republic of disappearedYugoslavia Hexagonal Montenegro afterthe Yugoslav parliament has adopted the Constitutional Charterof the State Unionof Serbia 148 147 to changed replaced membership by projects.In1990,Czechoslovakia andthename was other granted On February These were Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Slovenia (CEI 1992a, 1992b). 4 , after Polandjoined the organization (CEI1991b). This label lasted no longer 148 Pentagonal Currently, the CEI is the largest regional intergovernmental initiative that initiative intergovernmental regional largest is the CEI the Currently, th 2003, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia became the looseof Union Serbia and 147 the Hexagonal became the became Hexagonal the (CEI1990a,1990b,1991a).Ayearlater, this wasrenamed 197 Central EuropeanInitiative (CEI 1992a, (CEI CEU eTD Collection dissolutionthe of the Unionafter of immediately Serbia and Montenegro, membership Montenegro without granted followingInitiative the European normal applicationCentral the procedure. agreement, previous a following Nevertheless, admittance. for apply to needs Montenegro of Republic the state, independent memberof all initiatives inwhich the Unionof Serbia Montenegro and participated. Instead, as a newly split in 2006, only Serbia remained the legal successor of formerthe state entity thereforeand continued to be organizations, including regional all thein Central European Yugoslavia of Initiative. Republic Federal However,of the aftersuccessor Montenegro legal Serbiaand was the definitivelyMontenegro and of Serbia Union federation but the international status of the newly and Montenegrorenamed and votedcountry itself out of existence.remained This meant theunchanged. dissolution of the 74 years Accordingly,old Yugoslav the Community and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization As(NATO). reckoned byformer of major institutions,admission theirwithin security andmost welfare European notably the possibility to the respect with countries Western the from answers concrete for were pushing countries samethree the At oftime, the year. by middle that to beeffective the Pact Warsaw the from withdrawal their announced had Poland and Hungary Czechoslovakia, 1991, in January early of Visegrádthe Declaration, signature before the Onemonth pragmatic. was arrangement the of goal immediate The communications. and ecology, culture, society, civil such as economy, areas, in as well softer as security), military and political in intensifyof “matters Hungarian cooperation their (i.e.city to Visegrád security” of in agreed finally countries of three the and government of heads state the meetings, other and scope the purposes of such collaboration (Bunce 1997,248,Cottey After1999b, 70-1). many on because disagreements afailure the of in Thiswasnevertheless reunion Bratislava. arguments infavour between of cooperation a stronger three the a and countries, proposed Mazowiecki’s adopted Václav Havel President Czechoslovak 1990, the In Europe. Polish, onCentral debates Czechoslovak Hungarian dissidents’ and 1980s 1970s and by his wasinfluenced at the who, turn, Polishthe Mazowiecki, Tadeusz Minister Prime in of 1989, discourse have before the appeared seems to between countries these cooperation Czechthe Republic andSlovakia), HungaryandPoland since 1991. The idea of a stronger (later Czechoslovakia has together brought that initiative is aregional Group The Visegrád 7.1.2 The Visegrád Group 198 CEU eTD Collection access. The first to join was Slovenia, which became member in 1996. The next yearbecamein tojoin itaccess. Thefirst member 1996.The next Slovenia, which was was (Visegrád 1992b).However, Group unlikeCEFTA the VisegrádGroup, furtherwas open to arrangements Free Agreement(CEFTA) Central the amongEuropean Trade them - framework ofbilateral cooperation an economic 1992 the established countries three in 1993).Indeed, (Fitzmaurice inareas, especiallyin field cooperation other theeconomic more solid a of development led tothe have could rationale ersatz this of The disappearance vulnerable from this (Cottey viewpoint 1991b, 80,Bunce, 1997, 262). belonger no to seemed as theregion became unnecessary issues military security on well as after the signature of the NATO Partnership for Peace programs, acloser cooperation as and USSR, the of Warsaw the Pact dissolution the after and particularly wasset target states had already membershipdefined NATO as mainsecurity the for target them. this Once of these strategies security national the that mostly by fact the generated was cooperation previous talks aboutthis possibility (T these consultations of purpose the However, alsoestablished. was of Ministries of Defence representatives the wasOn occasions,1991b, 1992a).mechanism these betweenthe a regularof consultations not the creation mutual dialog in military political, and security was emphasizedproblems (Visegrád Group of whereof necessity the Prague(1992), (1991)and inKrakow in similarconferences two a common security noticeable been Theseissueshad results. addressed countries, however,previously without structure, byeach undertaken four the of integration efforts European the discussed participants the despitecountries” V4.Thefirstor reunion place newof this took structure in where 1993inKrakow some becameindependent“Four Visegrádcountries.intotwo group the Subsequently, the In less than two years from the adoptioninstrument toreinforce common this position (Jesenzky 2006, Geremek 2006). of an was this declaration the author, the with landmarkinterviews in ministers foreign Polish and Hungarian document, Czechoslovakia split Ę kés 1991). The avoidancemilitary of stronger a 199 CEU eTD Collection Jeszenszky at that time recall that there had been intense talks on this issuethe among intense onthis had talks been there that timethat recall Jeszenszky at Romanian Prime Minister representativesmany international both of by Interviewed organizations. author, the Petre Roman as the aswell among governments, communist former of the elites technocratic and Hungarianmore conservative the spread, particularly among neededremainedwidely was still Minister of thearea within Foreigncooperation an ideaeconomic that the Comecon, the of disappearance the Affairs After later. months several as wasdissolved short Comecon was the Géza arrangement planned International Economic Cooperation (OIEC). for for theOrganisation andopted acompromise Comecon of reached member the countries Mutual discussions, After 1991, 59). Interactions(van closed doors Economic Brabant the Economic Cooperation, the Organization for Economic Cooperation, and the Council for These Council werethe for wereproposed. variants Three initiative. rebranding the and much of discussion the thewithin Comecon focused onfinding asuitable name match to had regimes, this communistCentral organization only institutional makeup European a light collapsethe of the after Initially, (Comecon). Assistance for Mutual Economic Council the of fate the concerning debates intense the reflected its creation a certain extent, To region. from the projects toother much related was also CEFTA connection, its Visegrád Despite Bosnia-Herzegovina, Moldova,and Montenegro Serbia. inaccommodate 2006 the Former Yugoslav of Republic Macedonia andin Albania,2007 representatives that held OIEC was just an “internal working title” (Van Brabant 1991, 59). final choice announced wasfirst a Polish in journal inNovember January 1990butuntil 1991 official the Comecon (SVE), a choice which met with open opposition150 from most of the East European countries.149 The leave CEFTA, to bounded legally thus Union and of European the becamemembers founding countries followed byRomania threeyears and by later Bulgaria. In year the before 2003, one The USSR negotiators would have liked an acronym For a discussion whichof the implications would that havethe EU enlargementpreserved had forCEFTA, the see DangerfieldRussian (2006). acronym for 149 Croatia also signed the agreement. CEFTA to was then CEFTA extended agreement. alsosigned the Croatia 200 150 Nevertheless, the life of this label and the CEU eTD Collection inspiration (Dangerfield 2000, 42). of sources as served also provisions EFTA and WTO several though treaty, CEFTA of the content the influenced heavily countries Visegrád the of each with concluded Union European the that Agreements Europe provideevidence further thisin respect. As Martin DangefieldAgreements already Europe out, the tradepointed the chapters of and the documents CEFTA The channels. official Brussels the including chancelleries, the arrangement. It isvery plausible that the idea was formulated through interaction among different could indicate a more precise source forthis, while other interviewees strongly emphasized the local originof 151 longer a no CEFTA was through cooperation economic Community, the European the of members become some point at could states theses that signalled Brussels once However, closerandplatoon get Community to the 1993,45). (Vachudova as soon as possible. For the Central European states, it was a means to differentiate from formerthe communistcountries, which intention stated theirjoinopenly the to Communitythe to suit well both parts. For the EC, it was a solution for buying more time in the relation with chancelleries. European Central is2000, 30).It clear not for whetherfrom suchcollaborationsprang idea the the Brussels or CEFTA 2006,Dangerfield (Jeszenszky into and this region transformed ofthe economies third,less ambitious project facilitation of trade and cooperation amongmost the advanced (DangerfieldEuropean structures 2000,20-2). The European Community a supported (EC) Western the into integration from the away them taken have would that collaboration embark in form eager to of any not of were which region, the governments by dismissed the instrumentfor sustaining intra-regional Not surprisingly,trade. idea the was politically proposed the former communist countries formto a Central European Economic Union as an economic cooperation, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE) (Roman Due 2005). existenceto the of necessitythe viewon this further regional of policy an strategy to uncertain and extremely fluid environmentinternationalof politics toreadaptthe foreign resultefforts of frequently the changedvery as governments European 2005, Jeszenszkyduring 2006).Infact, theprioritiesperiod, of that Central the and East governments of the region, although there was no common position on the matter (Roman Some of the interviewees suggest that it may have been an idea coming from Brussels but none of them 151 Yet, in the particular context of the early 1990s,it seemed 201 CEU eTD Collection revitalisation that preceded the admission to NATO. 153 152 gained their independence from Russianthe Empire, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania World following Warinwhichthey the First from remained peacetreaties the unsolved mostly by hadvarious generated political and diplomatic disputes tensions that border end of the Cold War. As shownCooperation levelat governmental between Baltic three the republicshad existed before the in chapter 4, during The BalticCooperation7.1.3 the Interwar period, after a period declined moments despite various of resurrection. of having becontinuously as may perceived cooperation Visegrád the For these reasons, fostering process. signalledsuch tensionsEuropean not were that Union the enlargement the after also elections the but after shelved was Finally, dispute. the this impact on significant a had position reconciliatory Polish the even not that extent the to governments and Slovak Czech the themeirritated electoral political a Hungarian when happened occurred in 2002, when Visegrádthe was cooperation even threatened with dissolution. This Theworst of crises these 78-80). 1999b, split (Cottey the of after intensified Czechoslovakia plant hydroelectric Gabcikovo-Nagymaros the and Slovakia in minority Hungarian the over conflicts Particularly, Hungarian-Slovak the echoedwithin group. frequently the were bilateral disputes of aseries fact, In 2006). (Jeszenszky countries achieved four) (later three of the cooperation early the that hadtheimpact program no reckons, Group, Visegrád of andfinancinginstrument. initiators Yet,asGézasupporters the one of Jeszenszky,the since loosely1997 these institutionalisedstates their through relations establishmentthe of a meet year.each regularly Furthermore, to continued of countries four representatives the The unpredictable. rather been has club Visegrád the of evolution the onwards, priority for V4 as the a group (Geremek 2006,Jeszenszky 2006).From momentthis Cottey (1999b) evenput forward ideathe that Visegrád the Group arrivedhad toanend after short its 9. chapter in detail inmore treated are issues These 202 153 152 CEU eTD Collection requesting the recognition of Estonia’s independence and the UN membership (Fitzmaurice 1992, 118). 154 The jointcircumstances” (ibid.). current of 1934Treaty,Articlethe Two(2) to according Entente of “[improving]1934 andaimedat mutual mechanisms of the in asstated relations, Baltic the renewing wereexplicitly republics Baltic three the this declaration through of world”the (BC1990).The references preSoviet tothe stop donotperiod here. In fact, nations the among asequals Nations United inthe place legal and take their rightful ready to [are] Nations of members League of the areformer which “the countries, three states, clearly request for restoration of the signatories’ full sovereignty. In this respect, the document infact from a declaration This cooperation. USSRandindependence the was of an open of Supremethe of LatviaandEstonia, Councils Lithuania signedaDeclaration of and unity Nonetheless, collapse the before of Sovietthe Union, in May 1990in Tallinn, Chairmen the 1992, O’Connor 2003). mostly at civil society level, with ecology and culture as main issues of concern (Fitzmaurice manifested republicsincreasedbutwere within protests the hethree process these initiated, especially in the 1980s. of performance, economic viewpoint from the of USSR from the rest the and differentiated After the coming to powermilitateforindependence their continued to largely recalcitrant, they However, remained of Mikhail Gorbachev andLithuania not greater than was cooperation the between neighbouring republics.other Soviet the reforms and Latvia Estonia, level between governmental at cooperation the regimes, communist in succeed Sovietthe Union finally andthey incorporated inwere the 1940.During Baltic the alliances, their governmentsdeclared neutral but countries notdidstrategy this of systems their of weakness the Realizing relations. international of dynamics regional mechanismsand it lacking have proper defence, inof collective much did not weight the in German aggression but, the War context political of particular Worldpre-Second Europe established aBaltic in Entente 1934. This was adefence alliance against potential the Forinstance, in1972 various Estoniancivic organisations sent amemorandum to the United Nations 203 154 CEU eTD Collection the Scandinavianthe mostcountries, notably in the of framework Councilthe Balticthe of Sea with arrangements regional of a number in involved and space Nordic the towards mostly (Miniotaite foreign after Baltictheir independence, policy the Furthermore, oriented countries 2008). Russia with as well as Poland, with relation special a developed has and horizon Sweden and Denmark (Ozali significantRussian-speaking minority, preferreddevelop itsto relations with Germany, Baltichave doesnottwo a neighbours Männik 2008).Latvia, which theother unlike cultural relationsand geographic closeness, Finland hasstrong with (Schürman2001, dueto partially oneconomic grounds, partially foreign Estonia, concerns. policy different have hashadmuch Baltic three states asthe never depth, cooperation extended the and never BC the of membership The (BC). Cooperation Baltic the as known commonly is theentire structure forum 2003a), is cooperative (BCM) theleadingpolitical (BC1994a, parliamentarian 2003d).(BC 1994a,1994b, 2003a, ThoughtheBaltic Councilof Ministers cooperation in various fields andlevels, atdifferent including governmental and of trilateral astructure became in arrangement 1994, the alsoachieved was After goal this their from agenda (Ozali mainpriority on as the troops common their territory matters related toin mostly cooperate to continued three republics the 1990s, the half of first the achieved. In their political andSoviet military Union,securityDespite having been for designed the very of purpose precise independencegainingfrom the withthe theCouncil withdrawal ofRepublics” (BC 1990). of thethe RussianBaltic of StatesBaltic States, has created isnot theCouncil War.This arrangement sincetheendof Cold the participated countries have “to assistdisappeared in the full restoration(Fitzmaurice 1992,123-37)butalso first establishedin regional the arrangement which these after of state independencethisactions goal of the wasthree of the three Baltic states contributed to the disintegration of the Soviet Union Ƽ a 2008). Instead, LithuaniaInstead, hasa 2008). a Central also European 204 Ƽ a 2008,116). CEU eTD Collection mostly in the secondhalf ininstance, 1990s. For the of 1996, Azerbaijan, Moldova Georgia, has manifested space intheformer Soviet it.security This regionalism of“hard”to trend republics, either as ameans to distance these countries from Moscow or to bring them closer initiatives former Soviet new among emerged where Black sprangthe regionalism Sea, was where borders Russian tothe close area other The ofsecurity. complex Nordic-Baltic the of context particular the within Sea, Baltic of the shores the on developed arrangements USSR.Several in regimethe the changed time after a short in 1992,at appeared initiatives these of Most Federation. Russian born newly the of borders the at especially reshuffling, regional instability. changing security This forcontext new allowed configurations and of alarge amount andcreated dynamics international relations of a particular disappearance the meant USSR the of The breakdown collapsed. Union administration, Soviet the state the within for struggles power as internal the as inwell section, the previous briefly reminded States, Baltic actions three of the separatist concerted the following after, Soon Organization. dissolution tothe contributed Poland and Hungary Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, of particularly states, of political 4,theconcerted As shown inchapter actionsEuropean and of East Central the the regional 7.1.4 The Black Sea Economic Cooperation Soviet-leditwas resuscitated. occasionally, although ofcountries three the from governments lessthe attention Cooperation received system of security that was the Warsaw Pact 156 dissertation. particularly concerned withthe are Nordic these since and notYet, with the formercommunist ofcollaboration. space, sectors of they range wide do a not make the object covering of this arrangements other of series a are there area Baltic the in Cooperation, Baltic the and initiatives two these from Apart Sweden. and Norway Iceland, Finland, of Denmark, arrangement dialogue political aregional Council, Nordic of the extension an is Council Baltic Nordic The 1999a). (Cottey states member by the granted ofimportance terms in region Commission (CBSS 1992a, 1992b). European the and The CBSS Sweden is also Russia, the mostPoland, notable Norway, security Lithuania, organization Latvia, of Iceland, the Baltic Germany, Finland, Estonia, 155 and theNordicStates Council Baltic (NB8). This issue isdiscussed inmore detailchapter in 9. Council The of Baltic the Sea (CBSS) States forum isa of political dialogue developedby Denmark, 156 205 155 Under these circumstances, the Baltic the circumstances, Underthese CEU eTD Collection and Aurelianand Munteanu from the Molodva State University (Antonov 2006, Munteanu 2006, Degeratu 2007). security advisorfor the RomanianPresidency, aswell aswithViorica Antonov, Marshall Fund inMoldova, 157 Georgia, Greece, Bulgaria, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Albania, were states These para. 5). integration totheworld higherStates Participant economy” of (BSEC1992a, degreeof the to the establishment of CSCEprocess, the to as acontribution an cooperation develop economic “to agreed which they Europe-wide economic to according signed a declaration states area, participant of eleven when representatives 1992, the as well as to the achievement inJuneIstanbul at wasformally The created BSEC (BSEC). Cooperation Sea Economic of a concerned with the formerCurrently, only one organization around Russianthe SouthEastEuropean border is mostly communist but not exclusively2003. Soviet space.itincluding themembers,between (GUAM2001), a hascontinuously declined since charter This is the Black having important issuedseveral for documents the institutionalisation of cooperation the despite However, Moscow. distance from aimed members the to spacethat formerthe Soviet initiative in in the most visible 2000, GUUAMhadbecome 2005. By regional arrangement the left country this until GUUAM as known was which GUAM, the joined Uzbekistan cooperation, respect, mutual democracy, law, supremacy andof respectfor human (GUAM rights” 1997). In1999, frontiers, state of inviolability integrity, territorial sovereignty, for respect of guided principles by the secure Europe a stable and “for sakeof the Moldova –GUAM) after itissued ajointcommuniqué in which signatoriesthe militated of R. and Azerbaijan Ukraine, Georgia, (Group of arrangement as aregional recognised with OSCEprinciplesthe (GUAM1996). The followingyear, was group the officially in agreement internal mostly intheiraffairs) Russianinfluence (i.e. the security concerns and established Ukraine aninformal thataimedgroup regional address to their common Valuable insights into the evolutionof GUAM provided thediscussions withConstantin Degeratu, national 157 206 CEU eTD Collection 158 fall Turkey, For being in membership communism and the after 1989, after refused EU of Ozal. Turgut by first forward President, Turkish the The ideawas put of a BlackSearegion The surprisingchange of inagenda wasnot giventhecontext which initiativethe appeared. Z.2004). (Petre isolated partially from werestill they which Europe” Central more organized space and Sovietthe former the man’s landbetween noremain in a to “not chance wasatangible Bulgaria this Presidencyformerin Instead, 1999,128-9). as area(Pavliuk the foreign of policy Romanian advisorthe Mrs Zoe Petre Federation and Turkey, the organization was amechanism limitingfor each influenceother’s reckonedinto the worldin economy,a discussion andArmenia, Azerbaijan, enhance Georgia, and Moldova regarded BSEC as an instrumentfor integrating stability and republics Soviet former with The objectives. had different already in signatories security the issues, 1992 in thethe region. author, For andenvironmental in socio-economic needof cooperation still emphasized the declaration the Russian for Istanbul Therefore,Romania although the becamemuchbroader. ininitiative, this interest the and theirshowed more states 1991,when after However, region. Baltic developedinthe already its shore had that been heavy to industry close aseawith pattern around the of cooperation closely followed also it scheme, the of design initial in the issues environmental to granted within the communist bloc. low Through emphasison the politics fieldsand importancethe this respect, it tried to fill the gap left by the dissolution of the Comecon and the trade system In nature. and environmental socio-economic of problems, particularly domestic subregional common several and address of proximity geographical advantage enhance the which would arrangement, economic an be to intended was project the USSR, the of collapse the Until remained the same with the addition only of the Union of Serbia and Montenegro in 2004. membershipfar, Federation,Moldova, this So Romania, Russian the Turkey, andUkraine. After the separation of the two republics, only Serbia remained member of the organization. of the member remained only Serbia republics, two of the separation the After 207 158 CEU eTD Collection advancements. major reunion noother produced half 1990s, the of the second However, since for fundingprojects. regional financial resources the with provide organization the Bankto with purpose andthe (BSTDB) aBlackSeaTrade when Development itestablished apremierein area the organization produced In 1998,the also 1998b). personality (BSEC Economic Cooperation into a regional economic organization with international juridical Sea Black the transformed The document its adoption. ayearsince in lessthan was ratified progress accomplishedsignificant most The principles. CSCE/OSCE the to and Act Final Helsinki the to references at the BSEC summits documents of most post-communist regional the foundingorganizations, actsincluded was the adoption of inlikea main the Forthis reason, arising (BSEC1992b). dangernewthe of conflicts BSEC Charter, which was there that and stability region’s the were threatening member states between the tensions the that fact the emphasized which summit, Istanbul the of end the at declaration political within the stated they were openly In fact, of organization. the texts the founding permeated with and Suchissues Caucasian the heated points. asthemost Transdniestria region in instability area, the significant generated nation-states of (re)formation andthe empire this wasthis not possible 1998 until (Pavliukcountries 1999,136-7). member most of the difficulties financial to due However, 1996. since operated have should states, 160 its wish to participate in the scheme, it could not be refused (N N Adrian Affairs of Foreign Minister Romanian negotiations only with Bulgaria, Romania and the then SovietUnion. However, asrevealed by former 159 regional hegemon (Fitzmaurice 1993). become a to allow Turkey to were eager Greece nor Federation, Russian the successor, importantplay amore to thus leader,and regional andeconomic become apolitical to opportunity role long-waited a on been have could scheme the USSR, the the of dissolution the after especially international scene (Petre Z. 2004). However, neither the USSR The initial agreement was signed in and the bank, which is financed through contributions from the member the from contributions through financed is which bank, the and in signed was agreement initial The preliminary several encouraged government Turkish the and adhere to invited even not was Greece Initially, 159 ă stase in an interview with the author, when Greece manifested Greece when author, the with interview an in stase At the same time, the dissolution of Soviet the of dissolution same Atthe the time, 208 ă stase 2005). 160 CEU eTD Collection 161 whose major goal was to build and strengthen the civic structures and dialog spaces across Initiative, as Royaumont the known Better Europe. Eastern inSouth- relations and good-neighbourly stability of a Process of creation the proposed EuropeanThe first todesign a regional approach to the Balkans after the Union.Yugoslav wars ended was the Europe Immediately 7.2.1 From theRoyaumont Initiative tothe Pact for South EasternStability and bulk international of inCold regionalism post the War and Central Europe. Eastern aftersecond this of history the in milestones the presents section This thereconstruction. post-war signing to approaches regional different andgenerated ofinstruments different sets these proposed of the of Each countries. andtheneighbouring States United be the European the Union, to proved Dayton-Parisimportant most The so. do to willing were agents international other Instead, reconstruction. have for structures creating the environment provided of for dialogue post-war Agreements, theUNpresencecouldand not management peaceenforcement, conflict association with EU its monitor inthearea.Given UNcontinued situation the though to terminated, UNmissions violence muchthe larger.had Afterprocess wasended, widespread been its role Yet, brokerpeace arrangements. inthe later escalation to violenceof and prevent the to only initially intervened community international The republics. constitutive the of by dissolving the League Communistsof of Yugoslavia and free organizing in elections each democratization towards hadsteps first its taken state Yugoslav the shortly after andstarted Yugoslavia (SFRY). As previousthe shown this chapter, processwasmainly violenta one was communist and Central breakthe upof Eastern FederalEurope Socialistthe Republic of major event end After the of Cold Warthe collapse subsequent ofbipolarsystem, the asecond and the that changed7.2 Post-conflict regionalism: From international to regional ownership the shape and the dynamic of the relations within the post- Royaumont. Due to the place where the proposal was made on the 13 209 th of December 1995, viz. the French abbey of abbey French the viz. 1995, ofDecember 161 this was an arrangement CEU eTD Collection proposal for the arrangement belonged to France and it was presented as a European Union as a European it presented andwas France to belonged for arrangement the proposal MihaiCoordinator R Deputy As formerall. SECI interesting of is most the process the to European relates Union enjoyed The status. OSCEandtheCouncilthe way inwhichthe an associate Europe of Parliament, European the Commission, European the while status, membership full granted been have States United Turkey the and theRussian Federation, all to these, EU states, Albania, former as as Romania. Bulgaria,Hungary and Inaddition Yugoslav republics, well In terms of affiliation, the countries of the regionprotection. that were part of the Process were all todemocracy building andseminarshuman related various andon topics rights conferences the Annex A). In fact,it soon transformed into areunion at parliamentary level supplemented by strengthening and institutions democratic Stability civil society (European 1999, Initiative of purpose the with from region, the NGOs among of cooperation facilitator be a yetgoals but,by1998,the have changed. time,to intended again objectives Process the This to these respect with see much action not followed did level that athigh meetings The few much largeralready andequally to achieve: difficult Initiative 1999, Annex Stability whole the (European a widerregion” intoit covering incorporating perspective A). A coupletime same the at Plan, Peace Paris/Dayton of the of monthsimplementation the “guide to aimed it after, the missionwhen itwas created, InDecember1995, levels. bilateral multilateral and on borders, national of the organization was Affairs Council 1996, annex III). General (EU andhatreds andovercome ethnic divisions confidence anddialogue, torestoring contribute byaneighbour, any put obstacles in undertaking way the of thatunderstanding it is in abetter the interestpromote of each hostilities, of party to cooperatea resumption preventing rather and thanconflict to try systematically to from reducing contribute arisingthe to the tensions specifically,itshouldto try in Europe. More strengthen South-East stability good-neighbourliness and The inauguratedprocess atRoyaumont calls ajoint for and continuing effort to ă zvan Ungureanu acknowledged in a discussion with the author, the ina with author, the Ungureanudiscussion acknowledged zvan 210 CEU eTD Collection (Ungureanu 2003). process the accelerated intervention NATO’s but of end 1998, the at war, Kosovo the before appeared 163 OSCE the (EU General Affairs into Council, annex III). incorporated be process the that envisaged declaration Royaumont the that fact the to due is This only reference to it inthe sectiontreating the EU relations withthe OSCE (European Council 1995, part B). while acknowledging the fact that the scheme was adopted at the suggestion of the European Union, placed the 162 Union. European the of initiative atthe Europe Eastern for South Pact signedinJune1999aStability international andstates organizations forty than more of representatives the intervention, international prompted in 1999 Kosovo in violence increaseof After the space. Yugoslav former the by within a crisis was generated that arrangement regional was aEU-led Pact Stability the Initiative, Royaumont the Like Eastern Europe. for South Stability Pact into the incorporated was initiative entire the after, soon However, 2.7.1). 1999, Initiative Royaumontwas upgradedtoEU Special the (EU of Representative In 1999). in1999, within spacethefunction a newcrisis the contextof Yugoslav the former minister Panagiotisformer Greek have the as well as to do so, succeeded to It Process. the for Coordinator Roumeliotis lobbying creation particularly forthe of development, its position of the through later a EU inPolicy 1998(European beStability 1999).Greece continuedIntiative the for key to actor appointed Security Foreign and of EUCommon the finally part it became underGreekpressure, Yet, for the jobin the early(Council phases of its history, the process was intendedarrangements (Ungureanuof 2003).Although portrayed as initiativean of European the Union, to becomethe an OSCE program. European Dayton/Paris final of the led signature tothe Bosnia that on at thePeaceConference project Union Eastern Europe in their efforts to foster peace, democracy, respect for human rights, and for human rights, respect democracy, peace, foster to in efforts their Europe Eastern its foundingto theStability “aims document, atstrengtheningPact in countries South According 1999a). Europe”(Stability Pact Eastern for South stability and peace, prosperity framework of cooperation for the region was to mobilize the signatories to secure a “lasting FormerStability Pact Regional Envoy, Mihai R Two days after the creation of the initiative, the Presidency conclusions of the Madrid European Council, ă zvanUngureanu reckons that the idea of a Stability Pact 211 163 The purpose of this new international new this of purpose The 162 CEU eTD Collection almost thirty such agreements concluded across the region. the across concluded agreements such thirty almost 164 (SEECP). Process Cooperation East European South the closely cooperated, most notably European Cooperative and Southeast the (SECI) Initiative achievements of the were these distinguish whether to impossible is itStability often very In practice, these two. added to Pact or of theIn many moretheory, examplesof agreements anddifferent declarations political couldbe other regional initiatives space. Yugoslav in former mostly agreements the free of trade anetwork produced which with which the liberalisationMemorandum of facilitation trade on 2001), andUnderstanding (Stability Pact Pact Herzegovina, importantAlbania Another and project Pact 2002). (Stability wasthe Bosniaand werelater employed inMacedonia, formethods mediawhose Charter freedom independentthe from press formerthe From Yugoslavia. experiencethis issuedwas a and opposition the sustained Pact the crisis Kosovo the during example, For achievements. notablemany listreports Pact However, the (Muço2000). results significant of Pact’s the lack for the was anoften this criticism bureaucracy, complex rigid and from increasingly the mainly Stability Apartconsisted ininternational and approach Pact’s conferences. reunions the Initiative, like Royaumont the short, issues. In these answer thatcould projects promote and identify as well as region, in the problematic issues major discuss to required were WTs international and regional Organisations and Institutions” (ibid.). In more practical terms, the between “provide andfacilitatingthe States, coordination to effective participating was structures issues. role of The these security WT thirdcooperation,with while dealt the and development restructuration, economic to second the rights, human and democratization to was firstone (WTs). The asdedicated well Working Tables as three Coordinator, these goals, the arrangement set aSouth Eastern Europe Regional Table chaired by a Special inTo achievein toachieve wholethe (ibid.). stability economicorder region” prosperity, For different For reasons, this was ready not timeby initiallythe prescribed (2002)butin were 2007there 212 164 CEU eTD Collection has notproduced many results. widespread feeling among the officials staff and involved inthe thatprocess the organization although the For this reason, approachPact. later Stability the and Initiative Royaumont the led arrangements, of the EU- the of andtheactivities of SECI the activities the between SECI much overlapping been has has been there practice, In more 1996a). EU (SECI with treaties accession pre signed had already that states project-oriented, for the particularly Union, European the to integration economic and political of process the there but promote rather South Eastern Europe regional approach impedeto European Union’s the seems to be a 2001). The(SECI main wasPoints of principle Common the SECIshould thatthe not membership acquired SECI the years state this three after and only regime Milosevic’s initially from however, arrangementin politically the sanction excluded to an attempt F.R.Yugoslavia was, 1996b).The in (SECI Geneva of Purpose Initiative Statement Turkey, aswell Yugoslav former European the countries, signedthe Cooperative Southeast and Romania Moldova, Hungary, Bulgaria, Albania, In December 1996, arrangement. toinforwarded Richard Schifter states the regionthe participate in invitation the to the documentknown as Common understanding,Americanof Points ambassador EU-US European the Union (Lopandi and US the between agreement political some required area, the for initiatives with EU the largely overlapped it since year but, a least before at have appeared to seems arrangement reconstruction of Balkansthe after theDayton/Paris Theideaagreements. for this in cooperation help July a mechanism proposed Unitedto 1996 as States the the that of is framework (SECI) aregional Initiative European Cooperative The Southeast 7.2.2 Southeast European Cooperative Initiative ü 2001, 125-32). After 2001,125-32). this agreementwasreachedin a 213 CEU eTD Collection 165 was This vacant. remained Yugoslavia F.R. the seatof the year, one more than for when, Kosovo crisis, Thishappenedmembership during theOn one suspended. wasalso occasion, 2007 (SEECP2007a). itformally apply sincebutfor this there in wasno objection, wasacquired quickly relatively needed to it membership and granted inwas not automatic Montenegro Montenegro 2006, 2001,2004,2006).After dissolution the SerbiaMoldova in2006(SEECP of and organization the as full members: in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 2001, Croatia 2004 and and joined then status acquired states several European observer country. Onthesegrounds, membershipany state thatThe founding the organization is East to documents to open South weremore ambitious:objectives Yet,long-term the 200a). (SEECP and cooperation” area of peace, security, stability good-neighborly relations among all states in this region,for transforming this region intoan Process. Cooperation European East South into the changed later was name the government, of Romanian the initiative Neighbourliness,Good Stability, Security and Cooperation of At BalkanCountries. the the on Conference wasa inthis July1996.Initially, government of Bulgarian invitation the the Albania, Bulgaria,Greece,F.Y.R Macedonia, Romania, Turkey F.R.and Yugoslavia heldat of ministers foreign the meeting atathat cooperation regional for initiative as an emerged This is Dayton/Paris Cooperation East European (SEECP). agreements South the Process the of aftermath immediate the in developed that arrangement regional major third The 7.2.3 The SouthEast European Cooperation Process On this issue, see section 9.1.6 of chapter 9. in our countries.reform (ibid.)economic and democratic continued to ourselves commit we end, this to and, full intoeconomic and European prosperity andintegration structures Euro-Atlantic lies whosefuture in democracy, Europe aSouth-Eastern create peace, We aim to 165 The primary goal of the arrangement is to “strengthen the “strengthen to is arrangement the of goal primary The 214 CEU eTD Collection Bosnia-Herzegovina in2001(SEECP 2001). 167 regional consequences of their management of Kosovo the issue (Roman 2005). bilateral relations withYugoslavia, while making the Yugoslav leaders seriously paying attentionto the suspensioncommunity, atleast onthe general terms. Sanctioning diplomatically the Yugoslavof government through the hiscommitment forthis goal also interms of having seata position onKosovo consistent with that of the international since withinhis country aimed for“Euro-Atlantic integration,” the Romaniangovernment needed to show his thatthe it had beena difficult task forhis ministry to administerthe relation“SEECPwith the F.R. Yugoslavia. However, 166 club” was a solution for continuingpriorities forto themaintain SEECP asthemajor andinfrastructure identified and headsthe government ofstate energy, transport countries relatively but, despite good a existing new or initiatives related totheselong issues. As for economic the in dimension, 2001, Action Plan for Regionalspecific measures havebeen sofardrafted limited andwelcoming SEECP the itself the to Economic 2000a).With illegal firstcombating (SEECP andrespect tothe noactivities” third domains, justice and democracy, human dimension, “fieldsof the as aswell economy, and security, of politics spheres werethe These for collaboration. interest domains of three identified had they Already in the Charter, SEECP. within their cooperation of thepriorities better define to also attempted member states the les diffused, more or was crisis regional After this SEECP. the of foundations normative and institutional the for document key the as Bucharest whichCooperation in hadEastern Europe, South in been previousthe adopted year and Security Stability, Relations, Good-Neighbourly on Charter the signed representatives its after Yugoslavia wasreadmitted During presidency in2001, the F.Y.R. Macedonia of relationshostinghadRomania, which Yugoslavia. has traditionally good country, with the for particularly decision, easy an not was it but Kosovo in government Yugoslav the while Yugoslavia was notinvited. This was a means sanctionto diplomatically the actions of participated, and Turkey Macedonia, Romania F.Y.R. Greece, ofBulgaria, representatives the only Bucharest, in held meeting, that To Kosovo. in situation the analyze to aimed signalled at an extraordinary reunion of the SEECP Heads of State and Government that The adhesionof documentthis became a formal criterion forSEECP membership, withthe admissionof recalled Roman, Petre time, of that minister foreign Romanian former the author, the with interview an In 167 215 166 CEU eTD Collection profile domains proposed for profile collaboration,and culture, regional proposed environment such as domains fields of defence, internalAmong these, some programs have higher political as weightthey imply incooperation the affairs, labour programsguidelines and promote in fields thatseveral were identified askeyfor area. the and employment. Yet,Croatia there toare becomealso some memberor Q4, is mostly lowera diplomatic forum. On the short run,of it intends to fosterthe the efforts of Europeanadmission of Croatia. Union. Like the SEECP, the thiswith scheme, agreement, knowncooperation At as the a regional Quadrilateralbecame the in 1996 latter the by Cooperationsameproposed been time, it aims to instance,in between For had andSlovenia 2000,atrilateral arrangementItaly Hungary, that propose area. in the arrangements intergovernmental regional of wave of leda third inCentraland domesticandregional the dynamics EasternEurope to also normalization The agreements. other and treaties bilateral of signature the with diminished hadalso neighbours some between least, thehistorical tensions Not wasalsoclosed. chapter increasinglywere embarkingintoa phase consolidation,of were whilemarkets their becoming free. For that new stillthe institutions suggested weak, democracies transition. Though their political most of theBy Central2000, the7.3 The regionalism of democratic consolidation majorityand East ofEuropean the former states, communistmost notably with the Stability Pact for South Easternthe Europe. countries state-building and other each with overlapping frequent and of years collaboration several after embarked were close theto thelarger end ofreform of ispart this (SECI), Initiative Cooperative European the Southeast the case of in the Like area. efforts inthe address cooperation priorities the abetter to aiming reform process inrecently started which all regionalCooperation initiatives in South Eastern Europe have , no significant steps have been undertaken. Nonetheless, the SEECP has SEECP the Nonetheless, undertaken. been have steps significant no 216 CEU eTD Collection the Danube River and the SEECP. Danube Riverandthe the area, such as the Danube active inthe arrangements Commission, other USandseveral the Federation, Russian Macedonia, the the International alongsideisenjoys but remainedoutsideorganization the anobserver France, F.Y.R. status, Commission for the participate, while Montenegro to continued federation, Serbia disintegration of Yugoslav the Protection the ofAfter Europe. Eastern and Central in initiative regional other any by shared not afeature thatis status, fullmembership Europe alsoenjoy for South Eastern Stability Pact Ukraine andtheFederal Republic of The Commission Yugoslavia. European and the Slovenia, Slovakia, Romania, Moldova, Hungary, Germany, Republic, Czech the Croatia, Bulgaria, andHerzegovina, wereAustria, Bosnia states Initially, participant the Europe. with the support of the European Commission and the Stability Pactfor South Eastern and Romania Austria and of initiative the in at 2002 created an arrangement Process (DCP), space.is towards Only This still looks theDanubeCooperation this newinitiative one space. major cooperationhorizon notaddress and do problems specific the former to communist their as space Mediterranean have the new arrangements two these region, inthe initiatives However, unlike Europe. and regionalother Eastern other the inCentral organizations (AII2000a, 2000b).These identifiedare similar tothose by Quadrilateral the mostand of the andeducation culture protection, environment transport, cooperation, activities, economic for asfighting interest addressingissues illegal regional framework such consultative of a butrather become intenda fully-fledgedorganization itnot to does also Cooperation, Quadrilateral the Like Commission. European wellasthe as and Slovenia, Greece, Italy Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Albania, members are Its 2000a). (AII proposal the Italy of development. arrangement Another is Adriatic-Ionian the Initiative, established in2000 at 217 CEU eTD Collection Initiative as“a wasperceived diluted” organization, much too and Central the totheVisegrádsince itEuropean Group was deniedthemembership Minister of AffairsForeign Mele Teodor asformer in Balkans”, the and interests responsibilities with country a Central European 1990s, the Romanian foreign strategy has policy theideathat“Romaniadeveloped around is its policy (N foreign of dimension Central European enforce the found initiativein the chance this to Romanian the theview expressed government that notably with former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Hungary Geza Jeszensky and former Minister of Foreign Minister former Affairs of and BronislawPoland Geremek (MeleJeszensky Geza ofHungary Affairs of Foreign Minister former with notably Central EuropeanInitiative as a much too wide organization was present in several other interviews, most 169 view but in less direct terms. 168 Adrian N Minister Prime Romanian former author, the with interview an In opportunity. waited itmetaphorically (J.S 2006). put Affairs, Foreign of Ministry Slovenian the a member of of staff the interlocutors, my as of one states” former communist feeble allegedly leader of the experimented lady, still dreamingher of past, tobrand glorious herself thevigorous andas more old for Austrian the “an as opportunity interpreted were theregion, actions these throughout In some circles countries (DCP2001). riparian the among governmental coordination for priority well the areas as about as Danube, existing the arrangements around subregional and regional different the of coordination better a of possibility the about ideas collecting at aimed government Austrian the academics, as well as environment, business Vienna in1998,1999and 2001.Putting together decision-makers from both politicalthe and organized Danube itsin the government a seriesof around conferences collaboration through had itsin part already The Austrian interest amoremanifested consistent coagulating cooperation. such encouraging for reasons different had DCP the of initiators the of Each Apart from the former Other interviewees fromCroatia (I.F.2007), Hungary 2004)and (Gorka Romania(DeacRomanian 2005) asimilarheld Minister of Foreign Affairs Teodor Mele ă stase, one of the initiators and supporters of the Danube Cooperation Process, 168 For the Romanian government, the DCP was also a long a also was DCP the government, Romanian the For ú canu canu 2005, Jeszensky 2006, Geremek 2006). ú canu summarized it(Mele 218 169 ă Romaniahave didnot many stase 2005). Since early the 2005). stase ú canu, this evaluation of the ú canu 2005).However, CEU eTD Collection formulated twiceformulated in foundingthe document: explicitly is goal This context. European new the to initiatives existing the adapt to as frequent the overlapping, aswell to eliminate in European order regional East arrangements 2004). In this sense, itis part of the region-wide efforts to reform the universe of Central and contributeProcess intends the to tothe updatingBelgrade Convention of (DCP 2002c, Convention on the navigation regime on Danube, is still intoforce. The Danube Cooperation Second World War in one Danube Commission, whose founding document, the Belgrade the aftermath of immediate mergedinthe These theriver. navigation freeon guaranteeing of Danube hadbeen century, commissions purpose the establishedwith two partially through which flows joininternationalDanube into an Already in arrangement. 19 the hydrological basin Danube” (DCPof 2002a).This isnot firstthe time that the countries “from the states viz. the countries, Danubian among the cooperation foster to The DCPaims ownership of regional initiatives in area the (SP 1999,Geoan DCP was congruentEastern Europe, with a EU-drivenitsFinally, for after(DCP2004). theStability for enlargementSouth borders EU external Pact major regional goals, framework Policy, toitsissueNeighbourhood newEuropean addressing the correlated of strategy the a ofas cooperation,much wellbeen have to seems it Commission, European the of interest the for asAs DCP. the of thewith establishment the political creation the until its policy foreign of dimension Central European the manifest of to occasions the aim of creating energies and Danube at the energies emphasis2002a, resources basin mine) (DCP providing anew for channel regional ideas andinitiatives, focusing thus greater by Europe.The value should these efforts forProcess existing add to South-Eastern South- East Europeanregion,the by notably European for Commission the and Stability the Pact developed been already have that priorities of framework the within the region …the Process region Danube the within efforts their for appropriate, where focus, a providing and,existing structures harmonising wherenecessary, theirobjectives and efforts, dimensions, economic and political clear initiative] the give to agree countries participant [The should notlead toduplicationwithother existingformsofco-operationin anditsinitiatives whereimplemented relevantshould bedevisedand without creatinginstitutions new 219 , but taking stock of but takingstock the and using , ă 2006). th CEU eTD Collection not functional. Danubiancountries (www.danubecooperation.org). However, years three since the proposal, portalthe isstill 170 there arrangements, new creating than rather and, limit a reached have may Europe Eastern in feelingand Central be thatregionalism awidespread to thereseems business circles in political,various suggest and diplomatic Such region the across that developments been and rare have notproduced any result. significant isthere a business also forum businesslike havebut the the ministerial reunions, conferences likeframework, inthecaseof most initiatives regional of the in Europe, and Eastern Central difficulty manymatching agendas of so ministries the of Within in region. the the DCP this delay wasduring the autumn of it2006 butwas convened only in April 2007 inBelgrade. Apparently,generated byeffort from thethe participant states. lack of interestfurtherfor cooperation, noneof inthem was put evenifsomepractice, require didnot much of severala high level summitinin Bucharest Although2004. alist summitthis of generated proposals countries,place.first was one The in held inaugural the reunion in2002.This Vienna was followed by as well asactivity and meetings level majorthree heads of andtook state only at the government of by the held every other year (DCP 2002a). At governmental level, so far, there has not been much its institutional provisions, the DCP is mainly a political forum whose reunions should be it perspective, Accordingto Initiative. Central European longestablished this already the with greatly overlaps From priorities. top the among are cooperation trans-border) (i.e. regional economic,identity the sub- (DCP 2002a).In cultural, endeavour, this and environmental European common a of creation the asto as well security, European tothe contribute view to with a Danubiancountries the cooperationfoster among aims itspecifically, to More Danube. the on navigation of regime the organize and define that instruments legal international the of development the than ambitions wider has DCP the However, For instance, the DCP should have had a web portal for the development of trade and tourism among the 170 A third ministerial conference should have taken place taken have should conference ministerial A third 220 CEU eTD Collection SECI, and the BSEC seem illustrateto this pointbest, while the Visegrád Group, the SEECP the instance, CEI, the For variations. significant aresome there chapter, reviewed inthis schemes all characterize regional seems to feature this Although arrangements. regional the activity the of havedominated impetus political than rather processes technical/bureaucratic however, development, their Throughout agreement. an of phases initial in the role important an had commitment leadership arrangements, international of cases like other inthearea.First, creation international regionalism inmost the of and evolution Lookingback tothewholeCold post War several period, propositions can be uttered about question. reform will initiatives upon reflect other inCentral remainsand Eastern Europe an open whether this or inintergovernmental cooperation more efficiency willgenerate Whether this a more transforms ownedprocess. into regionally East European South Thus, Stability Pact. EU-led the leadfrom the taking of newcooperation, voice framework main of the political the becomes SEECP the arrangements, these replace not does RCC the Although 2007e). 2007a, (SEECP sectoral programs various their and European Process Cooperation East South the Initiative, Cooperative European Southeast the Europe, Eastern for South Pact all the existing initiatives thatestablishmentin 2007 of a Regional Council Cooperation thataims(RCC) atcoordinating I referred to as “post-conflict reformfirst possibility the arrangements. Thestepwasthe complexwebof this regional to regionalism”, viz. the about debate in yearslast hasbeenanintensive there the this reason, For bureaucratisation. Stability excessive byfrequent overlappingand warsarecharacterised of aftermath Yugoslav the the area. As shown in theis a strong needmake to the existing previousones more efficientin addressing the major problems of section, particularly the initiatives that emerged in the * 221 * * CEU eTD Collection larger strategy to achieve this reintegration goal. This strategy has includedacquiring strategy achieve This goal. this reintegration largerto strategy the Central and East EuropeanBeyond this specific identity dimension, which is more investigated thoroughly 9, in chapter governments seem to have framedcommunity, which the European Union would be the most complex representativeregionalism of. as democratic into the states part participant of the “reintegration” the to reference recurrent of a is a there arrangements, these to Union European the of participation the to speeches related the European Union butitsbe importance seemsto largely symbolic. In many of the be to seems associate desirable most The status. observer or guest associate, them granting by inthearea, arrangements all cooperation to regional international organizations relevant sector- or prestigious associate to tendency increasing an observe can one fact, In region. the in active have beenalso and states international organization although other United States, the and NATO the Union, European the been have present often most actors external The Council. Cooperation asRegional rebranded recently initiatives of umbrella of the coordinator – as political SEECP –the scheme builtcooperation locally sections, even intwo last in the thisAs Ishowed phases. initial casein the dominant even and there visible more is presence is a clear movement towards international where peacesettlement, regional wars andDayton/Paris Yugoslav of the aftermath ownership, with the in the European schemes developed East the South are Exceptional situations states. initiative and EastEuropean Central arrangements underhavebeencreatedatthe of scrutiny creating anddeveloping intergovernmental regional cooperation. Themajority regional of presentbut isequivalent this not with an andopenly widely expressed external for push frequently are region the to external actors rule. International be the seem to partnership or regional ownership involvedinprocesses, regional the actors whenit tothe comes Second, chapter. nextthe in isexploredin more detail This political input. difference andmoreto BC the sensitive are 222 CEU eTD Collection is the topic of chapter. nextthe is topic of the institutional the and practicesbeen of regional through these design arrangements addressed have countries European East and Central the of concerns security these way The region. by the disintegration of Yugoslavia and more recently by softer security issues presentin the later system, bipolar of firstthe by collapse the generated uncertainties security political the with cope to means a been has area in the regionalism international least, Not regionalism. European East and play case haveCentral the inof at been to seems conditionality a EU than ademocratic rather reason, these For international relations. sphere of in process the of a democratization the maybeproduct residual regionalism regardedas for democratic the transition and consolidation of countries. participantthe In sense,this relevant issues address to namely pragmatic, more even was collaboration intergovernmental and EastEuropean states through cooperation. At the same time, the declared aim of regional Central the of credentials democratic the partners Western show to means a was regionalism were not offered Especiallymost in have states been these asthe important. 1990s, when early the considered a clearmembership major to Westerninstitutions, among which European the Union and NATO answer whether the EU or NATO membership was possible, 223 CEU eTD Collection I possible forms of cooperation as they were defined in chapter in (one-dimensional, three chapter as theyweredefined possible forms of cooperation into one three of the arrangement each classify this to and from of cooperation areas specific the identify to aimed documents of analysis the scope, the to respect With sustainability. and within thegroup division power the of scope, arethe characteristics scrutiny. These under initiatives ofintergovernmental each regional of features seven the institutional the In firstthis section, using the grill institutionalof analysis developed inchapter3,I identify 8.1 Institutional design of caesura. elements and recurrences the of the identification facilitates comparison, which a cross-sector through is done this approach, ofa instead case-by-case but arrangements of regional seven these inlines proposed thirdthe second The chapter. section the examines (DCP). In the first section, the Process and DanubeCooperation the (SEECP) Process Cooperation EastEuropean South the CooperationEuropean Southeastthe Cooperative (SECI), Initiative Organization (BSEC), BlackSeaEconomic Cooperation, Baltic (V4), the the Visegrád the (CEI), Group of post-Coldinternational War in regionalism area:the the Central European Initiative cases notable most the of analysis acomparative through cohesiveness regional of dimension which itevolved in terms of goals and membership.This examineschapter institutional the intergovernmental cooperation emergedin Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the way in War regional post-Cold the underwhich circumstances the presented chapter The previous C NSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION OF REGIONAL COHESIVENESS HAPTER 8 institutional designinstitutional 224 of of isanalysed the along each organization institutional practices CEU eTD Collection to the specific domains of common interest. It only states, “the main areas of cooperation “theareasof main onlystates, It interest. common of domains specific to the isrespect alsovaguewith Union, NATO andtheEuropean to their accession Lithuania after and Latvia Estonia, between cooperation the of continuation the establishes that text political major isthe which in2003, in Kalvi issued States, Baltic the of Ministers Prime the they that for threeThe republics the are priority areas Joint (BC1994,2003a). Statementof 1994 and not referfield in2003,does anyspecific mentions amended but to cooperation of in adopted Ministers,was which Balticfor Council of the of reference Terms organization, economic cooperation” (BC documentssetting1990). The the institutional functioning of the scopeof iscooperation, the asthis regional definedarrangement “political only and and unity of Declaration the Cooperation, Baltic the of document founding the of text the In The Cooperation Baltic 8.1.1. is subsection there a summary of table findings. the end andatthe of each in order alphabetic arepresented initiatives the part, technical largely this of reading easier an For terms. financial in assessed also is organization the of executive). This is administrative indicator also an sustainability.Finally, the sustainability and consultative (operational, regionalism of types different three among distinguishes further that indicator an states, member the of dependent is initiative regional the which to thedegree assess I Then, regionalism). andplural clustered 3(hegemonic, chapter in designed categories of three the one under thecases of each classifying aim of with the these processes, Iidentify the number of dominant actors in the evolution of the organization organizations and, whereit interviews waspossible, on officials with in involved directly analysisthe power, of division the to respect With section. next the in analysed further is is that issue done on two an addresses, cooperation regional respective the that security ofnational sectors different dimensions. the identifying for essential is also areas these of identification The extensive). and intensive First, mostly based on official documents of the 225 CEU eTD Collection not established any structure of collaboration that executes the implementation of specific the implementation executes of of establishedthat collaboration not any structure have and interest common of issues on consult to only periodically meet governments three isit and a organization, the member states the between governmenthad the opportunity promote itsto priorities. In terms of division of power Having meantthateach has partners. membership presidency and asmall arotating plural developmentthe of from organization the of view mayand point itbe this classified as have dominated seemsto country nowithin theBC power, of divisions tothe With respect sectors. security national may be classified as an it thesereasons, For for governments. interest are of common areasthat all almost with deals BC the short, In change. not did they far so and 2005b) (BC affairs home and environment, defence, andcommunications, energy, transport are domains five officials. These seniorcommittees of five under different areresponsible headingsof were grouped which andand communications, economy, transport and tourism (BC 2004).In 2005, thesefields affairs, trade andeducation,migration, social science justice affairs, andhome technology, foreignenvironment, and EU affairs, geodesy, cartography and land informationreform, customs, energy, guarding, culture, and peacekeeping, border defence constructions, wereagriculture, these order, In alphabetical cooperation. areas of different as eighteen lists example, asmany 2004report to thescopeof For the explicitwith organization. respect more BCare the of on activities the level, reports the At technical (BC2003c). management” energy (IDcards,jointjointand control posts), border crisis crossing procedures discussed issues Rail facilitation Government such asViaBaltica, the of border Baltica, Ministers sometimes mention several projects.instance,concrete in For 2003,“the Heads of shouldbe reviewed periodically” (BC 2003b). However, jointcommuniqués the of Primethe . The major documents were not signed or proposed by signed twoof proposed major werenot or three the or . The documents one only extensive form of cooperation. Furthermore, the fields cover all the 226 consultative form of regionalism. The CEU eTD Collection Table designofthe 8.1Institutional Baltic Cooperation characteristics. financing. following The these of summarizes any table indicate source supplementary in the Baltic Council of Ministers” (BC 2003). The official reports of the organization do not Terms of reference explicitly states, “each country shall defray the costs of institutionalisation,its participation the BC is an degreeof the to respect with reasons, these For 2004). (BC2003a, declarations political to limited BCare the of activities the meetings, these within discussed issues are making of meetings. remains process ministerial manyvarious Though attribute the the each of Foreign threethe Affairs Ministries (BC2003a,2003b).Most of decision-the long even time hasbeenfor a within loose andstructure this of type secretariat permanent of a typicalnetwork of senior official committeesagenda and tasks forces, whose attributionis a This reports. the drafts and are discussions for issues similar proposes BCmeetings, the for agenda to those committee prepares the that structure has a technical level, organization ministerial the reunion at (BC 2005b).likeHowever, anyinternational in2003a). projects (BC 1994a, areas the cooperation of The Baltic Cooperation does not have a resources, the Baltic Cooperation is Cooperation Balticthe resources, states and themember initiative the between ofDivision powers arrangement the within actors dominant of Number Scope Dimension of analysis Consultative Plural Extensive Type ad hoc political dialogue fully supported fully 227 by memberthe states. In this respect, the executive or operational functions. operational or executive have not does ofcooperation structure this but with each other on issues of common interest The governments meet periodically to consult initiative. the No country manifested aleading role within tourism. and control border culture, to defence and trade agriculture, covered various domains, ranging from BC indeed the within discussions the practice, In interest. ofcommon area any include According to the institutional design, it may Observations . As for the financial sources and CEU eTD Collection “extraregional states,” and agreed to “examine the possibility of a BlackSea creating of possibility “examine the and agreedto states,” “extraregional called for a strengtheningThe BSECmembersininterest Balkan showedtheir also and the conflicts, Trans-Caucasian of the economic relations within the regions, as wellinternationally: as with became more ambitious, aiming atplaying a major role notonly regionally butalso BSEC sametime, the Atthe as priorities. transport and energy, fields communication, of the a conference In 1996,atprograms the more inMoscow, of precisewere action andidentified in interest their merely member countries declared cooperation vague very by was still and remained unsupported action a detailed plan. The initiative, scopeof 1992a,1992b).the Threeyearsthe of emergence (BSEC the after “economic cooperation” and consultation” as“political they were defined documents, Throughout 8.1.2 The Black Sea Economic Cooperation its history, the goals of BSEC changed several times. In the founding resources and sources Financial Degree of institutionalization Central Central InitiativeEuropean andEuro-Mediterranean Initiative (BSEC 1996). Baltic SeaStates, the and…the of Council Organization the Cooperation Economic States, Arab of League the Europe, of Council the Europe, for Commission Organization for Security in Unitedthe and Cooperation Europe, Nations Economic the Union, European the as such institutions such with interest common of in fields develop cooperation theirintention expressed] further to memberstates [The 1995). resources(BSEC long-term inprogram cooperation of the fieldproducing of anddistributinga energy initiating [and] Region; Sea Black inthe communication and transportation the improv[ing] the effectiveness andsafety of tradeandthe cooperation; […] business investigating the possibilities of concluding an agreement oragreements facilitating Fully supported dialogue Ad hoc political 228 Eachcountry defrays its cost forparticipation one of the member countries. member ofthe one in secretariat apermanent including structure, does not have a more institutionalised political declarations. Furthermore, the BC The activities of the organization consist in CEU eTD Collection and strongly promoted debates withinand strongly promoted the BSECon the hopingtopic, pipelines the that includes from them futureCaspian Sea oil of the the routes the debateson thought that the less initially Sea making Romania and dependentof energy. Bulgaria Russian the Europe Black Westernthe Europe through bypass to and arrive that Russia transport and gaswhose Caspian Sea. Caspian Russia have different economic views with respect to the oil and gas pipeline routes from the Forinstance,and of Turkey regional interests variousmember states. the divergent (Pavliuk, 132-3). 171 cooperation of range wide the Given respect. this in changes significant any been not have there areas, the Since then, and 1998a,1999). ecology trade, (BSEC networks, energy, telecommunication BSEC qualifies viz.transport, interest, of already major areas to added were affairs home and tourism as an activity. Sustainable development, medicine and pharmacy, science and technology, justice, of scope organization’s of the and adiversification agenda, forneed aneweconomic indicate the summits’ the andIstanbul declarations (1998) Yalta At(1999), materialized. made afreeconcerning 1997),this areawere ofintent never declarations public (BSEC trade several in 1999when 1997and negotiations, in especially despitethe acertain progress instance, For onpaper. most only remained Yet, of these (ibid.). free area” Economic trade practice, it remained mostly a mostly it practice, remained in However, organization. itbeexecutive should an 1998a), (BSEC BSECCharter the itsin institutional According to by Istanbul. Turkish notably most governmentdesign, the hosted (PERMIS) alsosecretariat a permanent has in legal 1998.It personality international regional organization isafully-fledged BSEC the institutionalization, degreeof the of From viewpoint the sectors. security national While Russia the prefers Baku-Grozny-Novorossiysk route, Turkey favours the Baku-Ceyhanpipeline 171 This is an important resource of the area, as well as a potential source of oil . As mentionedin. already it previous chapter, the acquired consultative forum. This seems to happen mainly happen This seems because forum.to of 229 extensive form of regionalism covering all covering regionalism of form CEU eTD Collection Bulgaria negotiate divergentinterests. Bulgaria negotiate and Greece Romania, Russia, iswhere Turkey, but heard rarely states smallCaucasian the 2007). Yet,2007). themoment, for theBSECremains a (Bryza various pipelineof totheconstruction routes related tensions economic increased the to more due even intensify might presence U.S. the subsecretary, USState to the assistant Bryza, Matthew with discussion in arecent Aswas tipped I Sea. theBlack around in the capitals various officials in sending the area, interest increased an recently manifested has States United this the reason, For Iraq). wars (i.e. andvery warm states) Caucasian among (i.e. the frozen both conflicts in of proximity very the a region tensioned, already withwhichfearstensions morelead government, Turkish this that in instability the to would to the Black Sea, whichorganizations, as supportswell as in the NATO. In fact, the Romanian strategy in NATO with respect a greater navalyearscooled inthe last thefactmembership they regional despite in that other share presence in the countries have the two between and relations the much circumspection area,this with perceived also contributed Blackthe leader aregional become Sea.Turkey at foreign thatRomania aiming policy, to synergy. Theincumbent Romanian President B Traian a Policy European Neighbourhood area–theBlackEU approach andtothe proposed Sea the within security Sea Black the of issue the leadon the took Romania enlargement, EU the2007 of aftermath the In settled. completely not issue is The Greece. to advantages with asitsupporting Bulgarian would more bring route, Greekgovernmentthe the variants, own their had Romania and Bulgaria version, common athird of instead However, Z.2004). (Petre for theirmight candidatures thisbe anasset governments hopedEU that infor both advisor Romanian the aninterview Presidency the author, with reckons Russian and Turkishfromwould version,meanttheirterritory, would transit athird have the different which ones. Furthermore, as Mrs. Zoe Petre, former senior foreign policy 230 cluster ă arrangement, in which the voice of voice the in which arrangement, sescu made this hisa priority for CEU eTD Collection enlargements from from enlargements in latea Quadrilateral 1989 by established cooperation Austria, Hungary, As shown in theCentral previousthe chapter, InitiativeEuropean developedseveral through 8.1.3 The Central European Initiative Table 8.2Institutionaldesign ofthe Black Sea Economic Cooperation indifficulty. BSTDB the often put which viable, economically not but imposed politically reports issued bythe bank, few the funded projects through this were instrument often annual positive the despite and that, continued have difficulties the that fact the author (Pavliuk, Off 136-7). record,the an official of BSTDBrevealedthe in interviewan with the countries, whichcontribute in various toitscapital, degrees was this notpossible until 1998 financialbut sincememberdue tothe havemostshould 1996 of operated difficulties the DevelopmentBank The initial (BSTDB). was agreement signed in 1994 andtheBSTDB and Trade BlackSea the its projects, financing for bank a established that initiative BSEC has been the first andFinally, for the moment in terms the only of financialCentral and Eastresources, European asregional already mentioned in the previous chapter, the resources and sources Financial Degree of institutionalization states and themember initiative the between ofDivision powers arrangement the within actors dominant of Number Scope Dimension of analysis Partially supported organization Regional Consultative Clustered Extensive Type 231 fluctuant contributions of the memberstates Bank) but this is still largely ondependent the Development and Sea Trade (Black bank formercommunist space that established a It is the only regional organization in the Istanbul. in secretariat apermanent has and 1998 It acquired international legal personality in forum consultative a itremained practice in arrangement, executive Although the institutional designsuggests an region the in power its more express to constantly active member, while Russia aims a been have it Greece, partially and Romania with together and secretariat permanent Turkey was the initiator and hosts the It covers all sectors of national security Observations CEU eTD Collection as in the case of the Quadrilateral, only the order changed: same the almost remained thescopeof collaboration Despitenewcontext, the 1990c). (CEI towards creatingcontribution a “is Pentagonal the that stated securitycountries five the of governments of heads and stability for the the in all factors change-overto Europe”, with relationsrespect … and in east-west …occurred changes from the old “major andthat tochanges” “revolutionary wasexperiencing Europe Eastern Central and the new order” structure one may observe thenew within of documents Quadrilateral, the the to Compared of Czechoslovakia. a stronger emphasisIn 1990, this initiative wastransformeda Pentagonal into cooperation admissionthe through on security. For instance,focus. economic a strong with initiative was apolitical regional Quadrilateral after noting thatforatmosphere andwide-ragingframeworks co-operation”Inshort, the solid (CEI1989a). political “agood creating at aimed Quadrilateral the cooperation, sectoral specific required many guidelines detailed andthe of energy. trade, Though cooperation, agricultural cooperation, four with issues, major subheadings: policy economic and industrial 1989b). Thelargest area wasthat of (CEI economic andinformation tourism, exhibitions, cooperation, environmental ofdisasters, in case cooperation cooperation, technical detailed under fieldswere these by the followingday deputy the Ministers, Prime In adopted a document eight different headings: economic cooperation,defined the scope of their cooperation as follows transports, of countries these Foreign Affairs of Ministers At time,the that Yugoslavia. S.F.R. and Italy scientific and The Pentagonal Initiative concentrates on the implementation of concrete, action- projects of countries,oriented interest especially in fivecommon tothe participant concrete, of implementation the on concentrates Initiative Pentagonal The 1989a) (CEI frontieroperation between regions. their respective co- of significance the emphasized also They interest. common of fields other environmental information tourism, transport, protection, culture, education,and industry, energy, of fields the in co-operation as well as relations technical scientific- and economic the to importance great attach Governments The four 232 CEU eTD Collection on on Security and Co-operationin (CSCE) andEurope European the Community: the Conference Council of thecooperation the Europe, especially with environment, through have initiativesecurity but caninthenewEuropean on role the cooperation the that Hexagonal cooperation, whose official documents nolonger put an emphasis on the fields of political security is This purposes. embedded more goal even visible in caseof the the theQuadrilateral had been Pentagonal used for and the partially societal sectors, security the and economic inmostly the have beenplaced goals could the to thataccording arrangements of andalthoughstate Therefore, (Jeszenszky Geremek governments 2006, 2006). were they politicallevel and at the heads collaboration dialogue of cooperation” wasachievedthrough and stability “promotion of security, the programs. Rather, concrete into and objectives goals in proposed the transforming Pentagonal succeeded the nor neither Quadrilateral the Minister Affairs of Foreign Bronislaw Geremek acknowledged in interviews with author, the Polish former and Jeszenszky Géza Affairs Foreign of Minister Hungarian former As confirming the far-reaching its significance of basic principles and objectives” (CEI 1991b). this inEurope, cooperation and stability security,of promotion the to contribution a specific structure, the Primestates of Ministers emphasize sixparticipant the “the Pentagonale made initiative.Hexagonal political In the declaration thisnew establishes that cooperative The intoa further enlargedPentagonal with transformedPoland andsubsequently was resurgence of forms resurgence of dangerous of ethnic 1991b) nationalism strifeand (CEI inhelping play overcome such role weakeningstability to tendencies a special any as can Hexagonale the Furthermore, … consultation. political Hexagonale future of the and decidedissuesin besecurity those that exchanges Europe will part anessential Prime agreed… onthe Ministers growingimportance of views exchanges of on the 1990c) information co-operation, and telecommunications, technological and scientific as well as education,enterprises, medium-sized culture and small and tourism. (CEI the field of transport, environmental protection, energy issues, co-operation between 233 CEU eTD Collection been includedin 1 (Economic Cluster development) of cooperation within the CEI, In fact,has since 2003). 2005,environment tothe (CEI goals economicsustainability rather subsumed initiative in andthey are original than the issues lessaddressed are environmental the Instead, exchanges. youth and media of promotion to protection rights human of more thesocietal range from security, CEIhighlights which aspects cooperation, the Furthermore,(CEI 1994c). unlike theQuadrilateral,mainlywhich emphasized economic the for minority instrument protection the rights of CEI in respect–the been established this has collaboration of framework a specific but declarations political in the mentioned only not is This dimension. rights human the to importance much grants CEI the Second, interest”). mutual of matters political on (“consultations collaboration the of dimension security CEI the its acknowledgesadditions. unlike explicitly First, predecessors, the political any of significant several are there However, Quadrilateral. the to compared same the mostly remained cooperation of fields the that observe may one scope, of definition this From matters: societal and inenvironmental cooperation economic, specific thefields highlighted of approach that butone may a of observe rapidissues and decline on security emphasis the areturn to within Hexagonal the those to similar remained declarations political the new arrangement, the Within andSlovenia. Croatia former republics–Bosnia-Herzegovina, three Yugoslav Initiative, replaced it after the dissolution of the S.F.R. Yugoslavia and the admission of only European asthe Central its predecessors lifehave than alonger not did The Hexagonale exchange, tourism; andinterregionalcross-border co-operation. (CEI 1995) media,youth education, culture, in co- andtechnology, operation theof field science environment; human of protection matters; humanitarian as well as minorities national to belonging persons of rights the including rights, human of observance strengthening the democratic and institutions telecommunication, agriculture; energy, in infrastructure of and transport, development technical co-operation; economic interest; mutual of matters political on consultations areas: following The co-operation within the framework of the CEI shall include, inter alia, the 234 CEU eTD Collection chairmanship of a working body” (CEI 1995). In this respect, the CEI is a according to2005, Jeszenszky 2006). This situation hasbeen favoured by institutional the design, which “each member state shall assume at least one chairmanship or co- an Despite the loose control of the member states, the CEI is notan operational organisation but 2006, Mele (Geremek diluted” is “too CEI the view that the expressed even interlocutors the some of fact, In observation. this confirmed also with organization the contact had direct makers that decision- different with interviews The WGs. the as such structures institutionalized most the in even CEI, the within dominance national any indicate not does affiliation national the and Ministers) tospecialised (WGs). groups working The analysis institutional the of structure (i.e.Prime rangingfrom high-level meetings arevarious structures, there organization, European isInitiative a fully-fledged theCentral viewpoint, From this in Trieste. at Italy headquarters with the secretariat The ofalltechnical coordination various activities isthese provided bya permanent security. societal matters of design, the organization relies mostly on WGs but for the coordination of coordination for WGs the but on mostly relies organization the of design, matters CEI has thetasktodesign the various executionand coordinate (CEI1995).In projects of and cross-borderand cooperation (CEI 2005c). civil protection, combating organised crime, information and media, migration, minorities, and interregional technology,youthand and affairs (CEI 2005b). Institutional The science Developmentcluster training, includes workingand groups on development resources human education, culture, on groups working includes cluster 172 as an arrangement of the To sum CEI qualifies scope combatingup, the (2005c). crimeorganised of the CEI has also started2005a).alongside agriculture, (CEI energy, tourism andtransport SMEs, promote cooperation within the fields of civil protection and the The other clusters are Human Development and Institutional Development. The Human Development Human The Development. Institutional and Development Human are clusters other The executive ú one. Beyond the political consultations that take place within itsframework, the canu 2005) and lacks the political leadership of one or more leadershiplacks (N countries one or the political 2005)and of canu extensive form of cooperation, with focus on political, economic and regional organization 235 . Within this regional this Within . plural 172 More recently, More initiative. ă stase CEU eTD Collection Table design 8.3Institutional ofthe Central European Initiative 1998a). Inthisis the CEI respect, a couldaffordnotit, that (CEI member viz. todo member countries “non-EUCEI states” the of representatives of the expenses andaccommodation finance travel the established to projects toup50percent of their2001). (CEI In1998,aSolidarity value Fund also was Fund,CEI has is fora Cooperation toby which co-financing contributed states memberthe Apartfrom exchangethe this, technical (CEI1995). programs know-how cooperation and particularly of finances most technicalprojects, itthe byItaly endowed which through special agreements.the European Bank for Reconstruction Most through thefundingProjects available for CEI coordinates This Projects. Secretariat for CEI and notably,Development (EBRD), Secretariat the ason aswell inTrieste, secretariat executive much onthe it relies execution with whomthe the CEI CEIhas has since 1991 a Trust Fund at the EBRD resources and sources Financial Degree of institutionalization states and themember initiative the between ofDivision powers arrangement the within actors dominant of Number Scope Dimension of analysis Partially supported It has a permanent secretariat in Trieste Regional organization Executive Plural Extensive Type partially supported 236 projects memberstates for the implementation of its it still relies on some contributionfrom the developed its ownfinancially instruments but and EBRD the with closely cooperates It guidelines political the with line in projects coordinate and generate to required are WGs The within the initiative countries manifested asignificant leading role within WGsthe and countryno groupor of activities, there is no dominant nationality CEI the for financing major provided has and secretariat permanent the hosts Italy Although political, economic and societal security to related matters on places takes Cooperation Observations initiative. CEU eTD Collection of the of the DCP (DCP 2004). 173 Despite coveringfour different sectors of security being thus an with as an organization inconverge declaration the founding vision with the DCP,whichthe definesitembedded of view This political identifiedof the one. may threesectors security, the one reason, add to this For dialogue. level political the of at remained cooperation Rather, areas. specific these so far, these objectives have not transformed into many concrete programs of cooperation in as shownin security.economic,and However, chapter, environmental previous the societal be as could a firstclassified glance, these at of security national viewpointthe paradigm, the From added. been have collaboration of areas other no and change not did objectives these also environmental, tourism, cultural and sub-regional (i.e. cross-border) dimensions. So far, has DCPcollaboration the and trade, from transport Apart theriver. on for trade of transport which through fosteringof facilitation with flows Danube purpose andthe themodernization by of created of countries Ministries the Transport the is structure Committee a coordinating the DCP aims mostly at withinfostering which transport issues, and particularly navigation, are the top priority. In this respect, one, economic the is the field main The areas. work major five in collaborate of participants the that the Corridor VII SteeringIn its founding(DCP 2002a), document the Danube Cooperation initiativeProcess proposes Committee.8.1.4 The DanubeCooperation Process This cooperation, it aims to answer one major rationale, viz. sustainable regional economic regional sustainable viz. rationale, major one answer to aims it cooperation, An almost identical statement was included also in the Final document of the Second Ministerial Conference Ministerial Second ofthe document Final the in also included was statement identical Analmost mine) improving emphasis the (DCP 2002a, region of the tosecurity operation,as aswell forms of co- various concrete of toeffective implementation impetus necessary the provide will countriesandwhich the Danubian andconcernsof specific objectives which will establishmulti-dimensional character, whose priorities for action within the Process, in accordance with the 173 237 main feature shall be itspoliticaldimension main featureshall be extensive type of CEU eTD Collection and the Stability Pact for South Europe.ThetwoEastern major countries remainedfor South and the Pact Stability the by initiated Austria andRomania andwas largely by supported European the Commission was (DCP) Process Cooperation Danube the chapter, in theprevious mentioned As already chapter. in next detail the in more is issue discussed This emphasize the fact that economic cooperation has also a cultural dimension (Geoan dimension has acultural also economic cooperation fact that theemphasize giveinitiative identity and to an the an attempt as this author, the wasaddedrather Romanian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mircea Geoan Mircea Affairs Foreign of Minister Romanian former As initiative. the for important particularly not is dimension cultural the documents, scale economic projects(Zidaru 2007).Finally, included although inall official the of smaller- asafacilitator be regarded DCPshould the perspective, this From initiatives. foster theirnot want to interfere development withinSecond, the thework DCP ofintends the already to be just in sensitive of mostcooperation. terms areas arethe theborder usually because benefit existinga forum of consultationsub-regionaland and areasguidelineofferinitiatives are provider. enhanced but Itto doesa through border of the relations theeconomic First, goals. of two theachievement frameworkcooperation allows such projects DCP the of in spheres the cooperation sub-regional of inclusion the that considers Affairs and from thisfor the entirebetter(DCP 2002a).In respect,this Irina in Zidaru,an official Ministry the Romanian of Foreign Danubian region coordinationwouldcountries participant areas of the border the of enhancing relations economic the mostly to economic development. Sub-regional cooperation, viz. cross-border cooperation, refers amongisfor same atthe sustainable areaof itbut, time, component concern amajor separate suchmay be areas.Environment considereda and partiallyaretraditional economic trade tourism Danubianthe countries through political coordination (DCP 2002a,2004,2007a).Transport, the second and third ministerial meetings, the DCP rationale is the economic development of development. As expressed inits founding as document, well in as final the declarations of 238 ă acknowledged in an interview with interview in an acknowledged ă 2006). CEU eTD Collection the revision”, “support the effort”, “welcome”, “welcome and support”, “take note”, “take “welcome”, “welcome and support”, theeffort”, revision”,the “support Final of document Second the meeting,Ministerial frequently participantsthe most “support instance, For in can befurthernoticed the in inlanguage documents. official the useof the of arrangement the character consultative in section. previous The in identified fields the the designed and continue functionto as a structure of consultation among the member countries the DCPnon-institutionalised (DCP2002c).otherinitiative“a words, was structure” In is the that fact the with together emphasized, frequently is cooperation of dimension political the documents official in all Furthermore, 2002a). (DCP initiatives” and ideas regional for new channel provide “a DCPisto of the that mission the state but any execute task can be a considered From the viewpoint of the divisions of power between the member states and the initiative, it may qualify as a staff member of the Slovenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (J.S. 2006). (J.S. Affairs of Foreign Ministry Slovenian of the member staff Department the inChamber of Commerce and Industry (Deacof Romania 2005) was and laterconfirmed by a 174 DCP. the joined Slovenia channels, Europediplomatic Eastern for South Pact and Stability Romanian apparently through Slovenian business community noteager toanotherto participate was scheme. In end,the the particularly the that area and signalled in the cooperation regional much of overlapping wasalready there that objected part Slovenian the in arrangement, the interest its expressing didmuchmanifestinmember interest fact, states not after initially collaboration. In the ministerialmeeting 2007a).However,other the duoandthe organized thethird (DCP DCP cooperation sodoandhave to 2007a). Recently, (DCP continued 2001, joined Serbia papers for the concept the and they distributed prepared Furthermore, of DCP countries. the meetings ministerial three) of (our two first the organized they First, initiative. the of engines This information was revealed first in an interview with Liliana Deac, Director of the External Affairs clustered consultative one. forum. The member states do forum. The member notgive states ita mandate to 174 Due to thesefacts, the Danube Cooperation Process 239 CEU eTD Collection Table design 8.4Institutional ofthe DanubeCooperation Process characteristics. institutional these summarizes which finance their reunions participation to and common projects. Table 8.4below is initiative the sources itsand financial resources, not much itmay developed, be regarded asa and transport For environment. these reasons, although structures these of cooperation are framework of mostcooperation areas, specific within notablywithin policy the field of ad hoc political dialogue. Asalready shown in previous the DCP section, the established a Foreign Affairs has coordinated much of its work. However, it did not remain at the stage of havebut not(DCP 2002c).The DCPsecretariat Ministry theAustrian does apermanent of its under aegis” actions aswell initiated andprojects as to interested states, of participation is DCPthe anon-institutionalized structure aiming atproviding“flexibility to as rationale of as arrangement, the asthemainwell functioning. principlesits for his In words, in RomanianMinister 2002, the of Affairs,Foreign MirceaGeoan Addressing thehigh level launchingthein conference DanubeCooperation Process Vienna not assess any specific activity initiativethe of (DCP2004). fulfil and do to give any task DCP the butdonot “encourage” importance”, “emphasize the Degree of institutionalization states and themember initiative the between ofDivision powers arrangement the within actors dominant of Number Scope Dimension of analysis Cooperative framework Cooperative Consultative Clustered Extensive Type 240 cooperative framework cooperative environmental and societal sectors of security economic, the to related fields in cooperation further for framework the Establishes of Danube basin hydrologic cooperation among countriesthe in the the consultation political through fostering Non-institutionalised structure that aims at impetuses. togetherwith Serbia, continue to give its major Eastern Europe initiated the arrangement and, Commission and the Stability Pact forSouth Austria and Romania, alongside the European each other to unrelated many ofareas arange covers It Observations fully supported fully . Finally,with respectto by the memberstates, by the ă briefly briefly the presented CEU eTD Collection clustered one. clustered a as qualifies organization the Romania, and Greece European Union, the namely theU.S., initiative, more have the promoted that of isactors agroup there Since financially. supported institutional arrangements indicate a regional Romanianthe mostlycontributed government utilitiesthe to 2004). expenses These (SECI and U.S. the however, activity, of year first the In states. member all by financed is Center This Bucharest. in functioned has Crime Transborder Combating for Center Regional SECI financially its related administration. Inmatters tocombatingillicit activities, since1999,a supports whichalso in coordinated by Greece, PRO network, Thessaloniki, a centre (SECI2006).Theseof of form improvementis SECI transport committees the goods the focus major facilitation” which are“structures of of whose committees, trade national PRO inspiredseries also TheUN/ECE a with coordinator. SECI the contacts as well theregular for project, aspecific initiated andconferences workshops thegroups, working reunions of has funding, the UN/ECE preparedthe SECI.With the has technically supported UN (UN/ECE) for Europe Commission Economic United issues, Nations the trade respect tothe With crime. transborder combating and trade on been has focus main the Yet, dimension. military minorit alsoa has in later chapter, this Asshown of security. sectors societal as an qualifies it areas, cooperation of variety large this to Due activities. illicit combating of field in the as well as infrastructure, and energy transport, trade, in particularly field, economic the in collaboration facilitating at aimed has SECI the coordination, political Through 8.1.5 The Southeast European Cooperative Initiative resources and sources Financial extensive form of regionalism that addresses issues from the political, economic and Fully supported 241 cooperative cooperative framework Member states finance their participation their finance states Member , which is partially CEU eTD Collection The South East European Cooperation Process isan Process Cooperation European East The South 8.1.6 The SouthEast European Cooperation Process Table design 8.5Institutional ofthe SoutheastEuropean Cooperative Initiative 2002a). Ever since, this Neighbourly Relations, Stability, in and Cooperation Security Eastern (SEECP South Europe Charter has been the organizationthe (SEECP 1999),togetherwithwas adopted onGood- Charter the main text to which contributionanother important states Process,to the asunderits presidency definitive nameof the havebrought Romania to organization. the adhereof development subsequent the all for basis the been in has with thetheir Sofia document 2007).Together this Declaration, cooperation (SEECP Foreign Affairs of the participant states, which would setin more detail the guidelines for of Ministers the of adeclaration adopted SEECP the its presidency, During establishment. its after reunion first the hosted and arrangement the welcomed government Greek The 1996). in atinitiative wascreated the 1996 (SEECP government Bulgarian the SEECP of The sectors. national security cover the all that issues large of areas rage address a Its resources and sources Financial Degree of institutionalization states and themember initiative the between ofDivision powers arrangement the within actors dominant of Number Scope Dimension of analysis Partially supported framework Cooperative Executive Clustered Extensive Type 242 extensive the World Bank World the supported through internationaldonors such as sustainability, while many of the projects are maincontributors to its institutional the are UN/ECE the and countries member The coordinated politically It hasvarious institutional bodies thatare decided jointly by the member states implement projects whose principles are Throughvarious bodies,it has todesign and host two of its main bodies many of its activities, Greece and Romania Union through the Stability Pact supported European the arrangement, the initiated US trafficking. combating notably most cooperation, as well ason home affairs issues, economic and trade on mostly focuses security sectors but due to institutional design all from ofareas range various a covers It Observations form of regional cooperation. CEU eTD Collection conduct political consultations and to promote cooperation on issues of issues cooperation promote of stability,on regional political andto conduct consultations held“to role hasthe This ayearand once isusually states. of participant the ministers they are not very frequent. The main forum for consultation is the summit of foreign thatholds beof informal level but meetings organized presidency, state the can the at this givefuture guidelinesand activities” for 2000b). recommendations initiative (SEECP Atthe and of cooperation overall process “review the to meet member countries of the government ministers. placeEach mainly takes this year, through type, this of processes in most Like level. diplomatic and summitspolitical at exclusively under of heads of thestate andpresidency hasfaractivity so is Its an institutionalized organization. developed The not SEECP government, as well as of ofthe foreign asa perceived the hostbe may SEECP the reasons, these For group. the country, within hegemon a of development the tocoordinateparticipants their and positions heads andisless agendas allow likely theto of stateyears creation after the fourin of and only Process forcesthe this system activated the 2003, and continuity good and promote relations amongstates. Although, the participantit was adopted SEECP has a system of inthe1990s, created organizations like manyother Furthermore, the initiative. leadingthe troika for the chairmanship,be seemsto ofstates group or state no leaders, asregional brand themselves to attempts Romanian and Greek asBulgarian, the a Despite meansinitiative. in the interest similar relatively to create institutionalinto the light 2007a,landmark (SEECP 2007c).Apart documents from legalthese contributionsthatbring a group reachedfinality several adoption Europe aof the inwith Eastern cooperation South of countries,intergovernmental regional of system entire the of reform the for plans the presidency, all thealso providedimpetus amajor to developmentthe of initiativethe when,underits 2007 participantbecome 2007c). More recently,has (SEECP members2001, order to of SEECP the Croatia states seem to have manifested plural initiative. 243 CEU eTD Collection priorities for theCroatian EU enlargement (I.F. 2007). EuropeanIntegration acknowledged inadiscussionwith the author, the reform of justice is among the top the and Rule ofLaw SouthEasternin Europe” (SEECP 2007d).Asanofficial MinistryCroatian ofthe of ministers of justice interiorand of the participant countries on the topic of “Standards of the European Union 176 2007c). to the institutional related frameworkprovisions of main the the organization However, remainsimilar generated. to have those SEECP of the the 2000 version with (SEECP relation 2007b,its and Council Cooperation Process 175 usual political dialogue in which Romanianthe governmenthad entered since thefall of facing cooperation inacompetitive trade was much environment more difficult than the institutional mechanisms of initiativethe (ibid.). the defining for document main is the which Charter, SEECP the to annex the of provisions within even the asexceptional andregarded minorimportance of these butare organized bealso levels can other at Reunions (ibid.). SEECP of the Directors of Committee the withincoordinated the Ministries Affairsof Foreign by which Politicalthe Directors, form are meetings all level, technical At Chairman-in-Office. as reunions the presides country host of minister the foreign The (ibid.). cooperation” andeconomic political security and Minister of Foreign Affairs Teodor Mele Affairs Teodor Foreign of Minister would haveinvolved more Z. than rhetoric(Petre 2004).Former commitment Romanian forhas indeed along preferred any form to political dialogue time other cooperation of that government Romanian the that mentions she Petre, Zoe advisor policy foreign former with forThe fieldwork this this supports dissertation information. interview Inan Iconducted institutionalised processbutBulgariathe of it andRomania(Bechev opposed 2005, 287). the supported GreeceandF.R.information Yugoslavia that theinteresting Bechev provides Dimitar of Process. the the institutionalisation towards is amove years, there In the recent reasons, the SEECP may qualify as an for important agenda the are presidency the (Mele issuesof that MeleAffairs Teodor For instance, in 2007, under the Croatian chairmanship, such a meeting was organized at the level of level the at organized was a meeting such chairmanship, Croatian the under 2007, in instance, For entitled annex, The , was recently amended to reflect the institutional transformations that the creationof the Regional Procedural aspectsandfollow-upSouth-East mechanisms ofthe European Cooperation ú canu reckons in an interview with the author, they interview they with held the inan author, canu reckons are usually on ad hocpolitical dialogue ú canu shares a similar view when he admitted that heview admitted when a similar shares canu 244 175 As former Romanian Minister of Foreign initiative. ú canu 2005). 176 For these CEU eTD Collection forum, the main political body of the larger Regional Cooperation Council (RCC). Since this Since (RCC). Council Cooperation Regional larger the of body political main the forum, area, nextpresidencythe heldby remains Croatia thethat SEECP proposed apolitical in the efforts reform larger the Within SEECP. the of enhancement institutional the for Plan an theprepared Action 2006). For this (SEECP purpose, Greekgovernment Stability Pact” steps and play an active role in order to shoulder some of the tasks and responsibilities of the and operational institutional necessary take the itself prepares to SEECP the that imperative this final respect,the in “it high-level summitdeclaration is 2006states of SEECP the anThis focus increased of suggests initiativethe anda institutionalisation. In possible future areas. justice and affairs home in as well as economic, in them of most countries, SEECP inpresidency fields 2006,several as forwere identified cooperation priorities among the (Mini negatively wasmuchmoreperceived government participation in the EU-led compared the voice could have hadanimportant which andequalstatus to Yugoslavia Stability Pact for Southdisintegration Eastern Europe inof whichthe violent tothe crisesthe related to due environment international from the area.Isolated the Yugoslav the Yugoslav project, BelgradeMontenegro) favoured a more consistentframework of cooperation may ledby the countries have of preferredismembership. highly It also F.R.Yugoslaviaplausible Serbiaand that (andlater a stronger SEECPsuch as itwas alsofear,Bulgaria thisto candidate second anaspiring that possible shared in Western chancelleries that were courted to forsignal wrong membershipthe sent have might in the cooperation NATO andregional of the EU. It is institutionalization very of degree require not much moreimportantly, than increasing most 2005).Secondand rhetoric” (Roman the does it as long as “commitment traditionally is which region, the towards MFA changeoff wouldinof usualattitude haverequired the Romanian andthe that asignificant haveitmeantmight wouldthat paid First,for not aneffort doublehave Romanian the part. communism communism (Mele ú canu 2005). The fear of increasing the degree of institutionalization ofinstitutionalization was increasingThe fearof degree the canu 2005). 245 ü 2002). During the 2002).During Greek CEU eTD Collection Table designof 8.6Institutional theSouth EastEuropean Cooperation Process characteristics. initiative. belowthese summarizes itis Thetable thissupported a fully perspective, From reunions. the financing for states member the of contribution the on completely relies SEECP the andresources, financial sources inof terms character, dialogue/consultative in the previous chapter. previous the in 177 is a arrangement the will. Therefore, itsact own able to of is not and that from member states execute the taskto any receive not remains to be seen. For the moment, it is largely a reunion2007a, 2007e). for political consultation that did Free Agreement (SEECP European Trade the Central and Initiative European Cooperative gathering the remnants of the Stability Pactfor South Eastern Europe, the Southeast it of butmore is also thework will RCC, which coordinate institutionalised structure, a proposal was adopted, the SEECP remained an ad hoc political dialogue form of cooperation resources and sources Financial Degree of institutionalization states and themember initiative the between ofDivision powers arrangement the within actors dominant of Number Scope Dimension of analysis The circumstances in which the Regional Cooperation Council was established are presented in more detail more in presented are established was Council Cooperation Regional the which in circumstances The 177 Whether the SEECP will evolve towards a regional cooperative framework Fully supported dialogue Ad hoc political Consultative Plural Extensive Type consultative 246 one. Finally,hoc thispolitical ad dueto reunions, are financed by the member states member by the financed are reunions, All activities of the SEECP, mainly high-level oriented Regional Cooperation Council due to its association with the more project- framework aregional towards evolve may It security matters related to economic and societal in interest increased an been has there lately issues related to political security, although It is a forum of political consultation mainly on actors major as Romania and Greece, Bulgaria, with clustered, rather was it occasions, several On of security sectors all from ofareas range alarge covers It Observations CEU eTD Collection in 2007 the contribution of each member state has inmaking 2007 thememberstate contribution Euro1.250.000, risen each of to afive in 2006 the IVF had alreadyabudgetmillion of (Visegrádover three andEuros Group 2006) Yet, small. andwere come intime didnot states member the of contributions years, the two incommon culture 1999b). andeducation, the fields first of Group projects (Visegrád In the itforinstrument financing1999, Fund International the established (IVF),an Visegrád has notestablished more of institutions are policycooperation that However, in oriented. 1999a,2004).For (Visegrádthis Group V4qualifies reason,the asan andindustriesinfrastructure and have alsosuch existed defence environment, arms as cooperationfields culture and to education, activities related provisions and other though areas of cooperation, most notably enlargement From process. 1994 onwards onemay perceive softer anincreased shifttowards in the societal security and EU the member states among the by competition the wasimpeded matter this sector with a particular focus cooperation chapter, on inin next detail more the asdiscussed but, theagenda dominated on Between economic and rapprochement this 1991a). 1994, 1993 economies Group (Visegrád in andtrade ofimproving services”with goods purpose the the effectiveness their of “based on principles economicthe freethe cooperation andmutuallyof market, beneficial an create an andto countries” particular of the interests with the in accordance … security to this document, the members intended to hold “regular consultations on the matters of their principles for laid thiscollaboration hadbeen downinAccording theVisegrád declaration. 1993. During this period, political and economic coordination were its main The priorities. into Thefirstdivided periods. three stretchesone roughly in since its creation 1991 until canbe evolution Visegrád Group of the From of the cooperation, scope view the the 8.1.7 The Visegrád Group Throughout itsThroughout history, organization the remainedmainly a regionalism. 247 consultative political forum that forum political extensive form of CEU eTD Collection characteristics of these initiatives and the way they evolved in relation with the national the with relation in evolved they way the and initiatives these of characteristics institutional the are which showing Europe, Eastern and in Central regionalism international In the previous section, Ianalyzed the institutional design of the seven most relevant cases of 8.2 Institutional practices Table 8.7Institutional design ofthe Visegrád Group promote ideathe offurtherinstitutionalisation. of supporter V4 cooperation,the hostinglike theIVF, but thenot other partners, does of Europe and the OSCE. At the same time, the sometimes marginalized Slovakia is astrong such Council the as organizations panEuropean mostly cooperation” heading“regional the policy a moreto regional approach. Infact, the Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs lists under of governments a widehavethis country European offoreign focus increasingly preferred the that suggests programs policy foreign Poland’s of analysis The arrangement. the in V4 is a dialogue Within and2005,2006). NGO projects scholarships (VisegrádGroup this million Eurototal 2007). budget (Visegrád ismostly forThis money financingGroup used resources and sources Financial Degree of institutionalization states and themember initiative the between ofDivision powers arrangement the within actors dominant of Number Scope Dimension of analysis plural form of international regionalism, there are no dominant actors and for this reason, initiative. However, occasionally one may observe a lower interest of of Poland interest lower a observe onemay occasionally However, initiative. Partially supported dialogue Ad hoc political Consultative Plural Extensive Type 248 which can be co-financed. can which projects, cooperation funding for contribute It has a common fund to whichstates has not been institutionalised in any way. Despite discussions on the matter, the initiative consultation. political for forum oriented cooperation, it has remained mainly a Although it has increasingly promoted policy- agenda. the dominated No member security, most notable from the societal one. of sectors other the from areas on emphasis coordination but currently there is more Initially focused onpolitical and economic Observations ad hocpolitical CEU eTD Collection should be attributed. Most part of the negotiation and an agreement between the two the between agreement an of negotiation and part the Most be attributed. should competition among regional international whichand organizations asto of them success this some been has there that reckons Presidency, Assembly General UN the of member staff former Teplevac, Elisabeth Mrs. myinterlocutors, of one issue, Onthis republic. former Yugoslav nameof the official andGreeceon the Macedonia F.Y.R. the between dispute the was contributed SEECP the which of diffusion the to tension significant Another years. ten last in the Albania in Minister Prime aYugoslav of visit official first the was inTirana reunion SEECP the at Pesic of Dragisa participation the time, that at to observe had been2002).suspended Furthermore, (SEECP as national and regional media didnotfail after the crisis of Kosovo duringYugoslavia, which the diplomatic as well relations asThis is for document alandmark considered the links Albania between bilateral and F.R. for between the theSouth two countries East European of AffairsForeign of Albania F.R.Yugoslavia and signed abilateral cooperation agreement. region, because 2002SEECPAnnualinstance,place atthe which Ministers in Conference, the took Tirana, it was the first treatyresults. For important the SEECP achievedseveral respect, this In dialogue. and diplomatic The hasremainedmainly political organization a channelfor (SEECP). Cooperation Process is East European focus South explicit regionthe security on the with political an initiatives East European addressissues into political related security, main the organization As can be inferred Regional cooperation8.2.1 in politicalsecurity areas from the above analysis of institutional environmental. and societal economic, military, design,viz. inchapter3, political, ofnational introduced security in sectors five regionalism the though all Central sectorand analysisdesign has institutional of the been inwhich way the examine I thesection, this In states. transformed member the of interests activities into concrete and cooperation. programs For thisof thepurpose, same I make seven a cross- cases of international 249 CEU eTD Collection of discussions within the Visegrád framework, the three members even creating a forum a forum membersof even three the creating Visegrádframework, within the of discussions focus had the been collective defence 1992, late until its Since creation Group. Visegrádthe was dimension havemilitary to a Europe andEastern inCentral initiative regional The first Regional cooperation8.2.2 in military security areas Process. Cooperation Danube the initiatives, of these themost recent including European regionalism, andEast ofCentral in cases norm other the been alsothe noteworthy impact has without consultation Political security. spheresof other limited toperiodic consultationfor reviewing andupdating the guidelines of in cooperation inis area this cooperation Currently, security. of from political viewpoint outcomes the important of as well as actions, common of number diminishing a to led has members the NATO and EU enlargement, as well as the different foreign and domestic policy agendas of for the race inthe partnercountries the has developed among competition that the chapter, in the next inmoreyears detail as discussed However, first existence. field inof their components beginning. from both very the cases, they In in results achieved significant this and The Visegrád Balticthe Group political strong had also security Cooperation arrangements. formsinternational aswell toother of as arrangements, be for the region a complementary diplomatic instrument to the usual bilateral or trilateral framework and is bindinga agreement for all members. In this respect, the SEECP proved to inscribed inOSCEdocuments, establishes theprinciples of cooperation within the SEECP Cooperation in Eastern Europe. ThisSouth which text, follows many of principlesthe political amajorThe SEECPalso document, produced 2006). (Teplevac them between normalize the relations helped Macedonia both Greece and of the Pact Stability andthe SECI the aswell as to SEECP, Charterthe to participation the that feeling awidespread been have seems to there chancelleries on Good-NeighbourlyHowever, GreekandMacedonian the within place UNframework. the within countries took Relations, Stability, Security and 250 CEU eTD Collection a possible threat to their major goal in terms of military security, namely NATOaccession. namely security, military in terms of major goal their to threat a possible Latviacountries, strengthening Estonia, regardedthe linksmilitary andLithuania of as their A similarsituation happened inthe Balticcase Cooperation.of the Like Visegrád the hardserious security guarantees. couldnot any them offer that framework regional the within cooperation the necessary andmadeless ties with Alliance the for whichstrengthened Peace(PfP), Partnership longerleast, in excluded. Not 1994, all statesbecame Visegrád the members of NATO the much more nuanced andsuggested that possibility the NATOthe of was no enlargement leaders Western were of the declarations by 1992political met initially refusal, anexplicit sameAtthe had askedformembership time, NATO and, openly though they and repeatedly states. European and East Central between newly dialogue the NATO and the democratizing hadbecome members of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC), a structure of accedemembership tothe of Atlantic North the Alliance. In1991, theVisegrád countries to countries partner the of chances the hindered have might it that fear for strengthened been military hasnever collaboration issues the on chapter, inconcerns, asargued the previous territory inRachwald Simon 1994(Piotrowski and such common 2001, 2004). Despite withdrew Polish from membership,” completely Russian troops Polandthe NATOof pursuit for “respect of Boris declaration Yeltsin’s Russian President with negotiations culminating muchFederation, process took longer the intensive andonlyafter diplomatic and political in Russian of newly neighbour the increated adirect withdrewPoland, 1991.However, three countries had on their territory Soviet troops. From Czechoslovakia and Hungary, these all regimes communist the fallof atthe because also 1990s in early the pressing particularly and military security, safely distancing from the grasp of the Soviet Union. The situation was achieve political wasto Group the of major concern the its creation, time the of at because 1991b,1992a).Thishappened Group for (Visegrád theirconsultation of Ministries Defence 251 CEU eTD Collection reckoned in reckoned with discussions this of author, is Ministries the the coordination of Defence Jovan Ananiev, Director for Crisisin Management Macedonianthe Ministry of Defense, Presidency,senior the for Romanian and national security advisor Degeratu, Constantin coordinated as by Nonetheless, in networks or SEDM. and created information region, the SimulationEurope (SEESIM)whosepurpose isNetwork initiatives tointegrate differentthe Defense Ministers of ten countries, the participants decided the creation of the South Eastern Military Emergency during Council. 2000, Planning October In SEDMreunion the of the Civil- Europe and Eastern South the CrisisInformation Network Force, Engineering Task Brigade (SEEBRIG), Europe initiatives -South Eastern andits subsidiary (SEDM) DefenseMinisterial European Eastern South tothe are associated andSEECP The SECI andthe (BSEC). Black SeaEconomic (SECI) Cooperation Cooperative Initiative European Southeast the (SEECP), Process Cooperation EastEuropean South are the security military haveto related issues Europe that in addressed The other organizations and Eastern Central cooperation. trilateral their respect to with and rathergoals economic societal pursue to encouraged externally hadbeen Lithuania thisreason,Estonia,and Latvia For case Cooperation. of Visegrád the in the close proximity of Russia, as it was the case of the Baltic republics, than it was in the 179 chapter. previous the in Cooperation Baltic on the section see the republics, 178 Council (NB8). Baltic Nordic (CBSS)and the States Sea Baltic the Council of mostly the BC, within of the framework the place alsooutside in region the took Baltic region tothe issues related similarly to the V4. Nonetheless, unlike the Visegrád Group, discussions on military security members of NACCin the 1991. In1994,all countriesthree became members of PfP,the became Romania USSR,they and the Bulgaria, withcountries, Together Visegrád the This issue of is discussed in more detail in the next chapter. next the in detail more in discussed ofis issue This Baltic three of the strategies policy foreign the for relevance and membership NB8 and CBSS the On 178 Furthermore, strengthening military cooperation was much more sensitive 179 252 CEU eTD Collection class” (Mele realized that free trade is difficult; we really had to make our lessons if we wanted to pass the interview with position.As former Romanian Minister Affairs of Foreign Mele Teodor the author, “weminimal political commitment. The strict termsthought theof CEFTA forced them reconsiderto this it wasinvolvingsome not except arrangementwas anything this considered trade initially that just anotherhadperiod, communist developedthe rhetoricthat during regional on cooperation content” political project At samegovernments, usedwith94-5). the “forms some time, of without the participant the but we soon andstructured hadtheir relatively products high mediocreprices and quality (Kupich 1999, by influenced werestill old economies the theirFurthermore, to third with countries. respect in their economic relationsincluding thatjoined natural politically. members, CEFTAlater, those were The competitors with the Europeanreasons. Union and did not Visegrádthe did much partners notcooperate have withinlargely the for CEFTA, political commonNonetheless,demonstrates, chapter next strategies As the Group. Visegrád the of offshoot economic an (CEFTA), Area Free Trade Central the European in has emerged been area the that arrangement the weak trade important most The andtradefacilitation. trade respect to with security, particularly performance economic of field the in been has results of terms in cooperation developed most The Regional cooperation8.2.3 in the economic security areas of the CEFTA conflicts. Caucasian was agendanot only in motivatedrelation tomilitary political securitysecurity issues, As for the BSEC, the analysis its of official only between documents 1992andindicates thathas 2007 mostnever notably been with the respect partnerships thana genuinely regional military 2007,Ananievcooperation (Degeratu 2006). major to focusthe frozen of the NATO of or NATO framework the within coordination of the asubsidiary rather organization and appeared on the ú canu 2005). For canu 2005).For these CEFTAreasons, the has increasingly been perceived asa 253 ú canu put itincanu put an CEU eTD Collection approach, known as public-private partnership (PPP), was similar knownas partnership approach, (PPP), inpublic-private both cases very and EasternSouth Europe. The WorldBank alsoSECIcontributed directly projects. to The financemostly They to withinforframework suchprojects. of so did the Stability the Pact donors international encouraged U.S. the and Union European the reason, this For projects. often complained they not have did money implementor developto common infrastructure in The involved in governments picture. reveal this cooperation a lesssatisfying region the staff and decision-makers with discussions the However, countries. partner the among trade increase of the notably most successes various list programs related its trade and SECI the In fact,Initiative was established SECI (SECI). the In for this purpose. official documents, Cooperative European Southeast wasthe facilitation for trade instrument major Another would come. integration” “European that obtain guarantees to labelattempting identity were they regional a certain of appropriation way, through Free TradeArea.In this “South East European” to European” “Central from name of changing the opposed interestingly, but, themselves among sign accepted free arrangements Finally, moreto trade 2007). states the (I.F. integration” “European an not alternative to ratheras a complementary be understood should integration” “regional that convince framework former to SEECP the states through Yugoslav the that there havebeen many diplomatic efforts from the part of the European Union, as well as my interviewees, an official in the Croatian Ministry of European Integration, acknowledged of one In this andrespect, EU. the remainoutside recreate aYugoslav project encouraged to they that were states inthese concern political widespread a been has there framework, withincooperate them this to Union Although European members.the encouraged left arrangement,onlyformerthe remained Union Yugoslav republics and consequently cooperation fact,within CEFTA. afterthe In Bulgaria andRomaniajoined theEuropean furthered has Yet,this enlargement. for not perception inpreparatory EU economy class 254 CEU eTD Collection the conference the collected sum was EUR 2.4 billion. 2.4 EUR was sum collected the conference the took place in Brussels in 2000 the value of the over 200180 projects chosen was EUR 1.8 billion but at the end of the However, companies. oflarge was invite representatives to alsothe proposed needs and possibilitiesreflect the not might projects choose and decide representatives way these the that argued of the companies itwas However, of Commerce. Chambers that the and of Businessmen the Associations as the could implement theusually a mix of representativesministries from businessand professional associations such contracts. The solution choice the isa partnerships, in public-private participation tothe these with instance, respect the regionalThis led spreadof tothe corruption suspicions, which affected trustthe of participantsthe in organizations. open competition. andmere without political ground on number sometimes companies, of The times,design governments of theoffer projects intermediariespropose framing them through governmental Other as priorities. theinitiatives contract for happenscompanies that wanting getthespecific to usually contracts, by paid government,the implementation alsoalso it revealed, community donor the from officials with as well as favours environment, ofbusiness the projects thisto a selected the of representatives with As discussions slower. even procedures thebureaucratic makes situation. who intermediary anunnecessary becomes theregional organization sometimes In practice, For was able tocollect even significantly more funds than the value of the projects in question In some cases,like “Quickthe Start Package” program of the Stability Pact, the organization projects. chosen fundingfor all the produce to been capable has approach PPP the In theory, which offers thefunding. donorthe community governments(international organizations, andprivate institutions), them to andprojects proposes best the selects Pact) or Stability the SECI (i.e. organization regional the Then, region. the of development the for impact with projects regional hasnationalroughly followingscheme. Theparticipantcountries propose respectedthe or According to the official website (www.stabilitypact.org), at the first Regional Funding Conference that 255 180 CEU eTD Collection meetings so that they share the information with others. Third, even if such representatives such if even Third, others. with information the share they that so meetings representatives should beenough of uninterested the business providedopportunities bysuch these Then, had. they discussions the about associations professional other and Commerce informreunions and to suchnational structures theministries,as the Chambers of tothese participate to both time business milieuwhohave of the prestigious representatives Theenvironment. institutional is device again tricky. First,one must find andimportant business national andthe organizations regional these between communication facilitate Council (BAC). This is a structure of executives from each participant country that has the to Cooperative Initiative had specific institutions finallythat merged into a Business Advisory For instance, bothinEastern Europe. initiativeslocalabout theactivity South environmentregional business of the Stabilityinformingfor responsible A similarsituationwith canbefound inrelation structures the the Pact for South initiatives. East Europe andin mistrust frustration further and regional the seekingdeception create and advantage the SoutheastCommerceit andin nicely Industry, interviewput an with These author. the mechanisms of European for Chamber for Romanian in External Affairs the Director as Liliana Deac, cheating,” half are they that conscious “half are participants the all Nonetheless, achieved. been donors a significant number of hopingfor usefulinformation Asfor and contacts. organisers,the they totheirparticipantscan report and thus provesuch be at reunions, to pleased are many executives fees, thatpay havenot participation do to the goals of the event have and funded sometimes trainings, through programs initiatives. of regional if Particularly they mimic consulting themselves with businessthe commonly environment, seminarsthrough frequently representatives governmental the sametime, Atthe funding.public to as access domestic and regional markets, because in this way they can getinside information, the on as companies well large for advantage unfair an be may initiatives such to participation 256 CEU eTD Collection European regionalism is a form without much content. Therefore, from the perspective of the mostly by widespreadThis view befavoured opinion seems Central the that to and East buta higherin toaposition participate compared governments one a ministerial department. which to the international comparedorganizations to status prestige lower general a suggested that intergovernmental regional inorganizations Central andin Easternhave motivation fieldwork are staff involved. poorskills of The the the sector security and/or in impede regional economy the cooperation factors that other business environment, from lackof and economic competition the Apart political the the motivations, a mature and economic for publicprivate the development. sector the between moreneed cooperation area would this exactly although avoided, frequently riskyYugoslav astoo businessinvestmentspace isstill for regarded is therefore it and former the Particularly of government. revolutionary changes or conflicts ethnic the normal media that almost never presents news from the neighbouring on rely countries entrepreneurs many except for available, easily not is region the on information business same Atthe time, since use thechannelsby organizations. regional andnot the provided do solitary arerather initiatives the regional of development tothe contribute could and which markets in regional onthe interested expanding many companies thesereasons, For interests. particular economic to related and complete fuelledfurther suspicions story was this of information,this interactions, duetotheir partially impression previous had the theirthat they did tell to the national structures what had been discussed within the BAC, the receivers they didinform usually of restthe not businessthe Inthefewenvironment. casesin which went, they when or reunions BAC to go not do either representatives these is that respect, in in more detail this Icould documentin Romania, which the caseof happened inpractice what small and very are people tofind these chances business community. The national the beother of linked interestinterestthan any exist, they not should the economic to particular 257 CEU eTD Collection some cases, they were less prepared than their fellows in the area. Especially in post conflict in post Especially fellows area. than the their less prepared they were some cases, Western withexperts because whom they collaborated they had much higherin salaries and, the to resent started initiatives inregional staff involved the After awhile,however, years. first in the least at prestigious, most the been have Westerners by taught ones The program. The quality of something and everybody was happy.” trainers seemstrainers or the trainees:to have “theyfor the very either not serious idea trainings were that one advancesthe Another Americans.” mimed been that they taughtdecisive us something,I have been in fieldforthis thirty years and Ihave with worked everybody: Russians,Arabs, we mimed for we learned thefollows “they came to teach us but what can successI be taught atmy age and I don’t already know? of trainingas justified towards hisreticence my interlocutors of toacquire. One were supposed a skill-learningsometimes less receptivethisin issue, invested thegovernments this for trainings staff. older The personnelhasbeen to such trainings and has most has projects. generate programs. Toaddress This visibly in reflected to difficulty the not internalized properly for designing staff lackedprepared have organizations European and East phases, Central the skills they inespecially it initial seems the that However, inthis respect. practices identify common to isit difficult initiative.Therefore, to each respect with and in each country very different are beprocedures perceived might organizations recruitment even The as adowngrading. to Affairs, of Foreign one inthese detachment experiencedof Ministry the personnel intergovernmental initiatives in as Central and Eastern lessEurope moreFor prestigious. in the Ministry Affairs,Foreign of who usually forperceive regional thework higher within the state administration. The situation isgeneral in slightly is which has, different Affairs for peopleForeign of workingMinistry the of staff the that one the to similar mightjob notrequire muchbut would be paid better probably and would provide astatus ministerial clerks who might be delegated to work for one of these regional initiatives, the 258 CEU eTD Collection in this fieldin this in aremore diverse Festivals,youth than sectors. exchange other programs, ranking in cooperation.terms in activities of The which partner countries have involvedthe is lowest the of one migration, and tourism education, suchas culture, range fields, of Theseissues are not so presentin the societal security sector, which, despite covering a wide 8.2.4 Regional cooperation thesocietal in areassecurity community. much becausepublicity, this would have affected theimage also of donorandthe thedonor aware of such issues but theyfinanced most of the injection of the Western triedexpertise in the area seem haveto been usually to solve the problemsUNDP and the World acknowledged Bank in the with discussions donors who author, the on a case by case basis, Balkansthe methods andare not Western for this, universal enough.”As from officials the without to approach specific in weneedan us as inSomalia Sudan; or we were followstreat “they longerreconstruction are no Ayoung appropriate. expressed local this frustration expert as theBalkan foster to andthen wars Yugoslav inthe appease the conflicts region to in the brought methods Western the that view the developed has years, last the in particularly regionalism, conflict post the of in case least, the Not 2006). (Ananiev local one a than more time ten to seven can get expert Western a samejob for the that estimated interviewee One region. the to sent Westerner a than less significantly wins “local” young a range, age financially-motivated resentment– with backgroundsimilar educational andwithin asimilar whichof youngerlocal variouswith trainings another led experts abroad, and studies to mayAlso, in increase notice asitimproved theone recruitment more experience. an gained significantly been has staff “local” the of professionalism the as lately, grown has frustration betterwere considered may apriori than haveanything the local The staff produced. solutions,”“Western adopt which the to urged them ignored who bytheirsuperiors frequent inputwas butmore region about the their knew sometimes “locals” initiatives, regional 259 CEU eTD Collection Baltic Cooperation (BC), where environmental issues have received more attention than in than attention more received have issues environmental where (BC), Cooperation Baltic haveA most abilateral is preferred governments approach. notable thecase exception the of borders, attheir concerns environmental are there when especially level. Rather, regional political leadership doesnot seem havemuchto shown interest with respect to topicthe at European initiatives, that,withregional indicate exception the of environmental accidents, analysis of the official documents, political declarations and reports of the Central and East agreements that are implemented at the levelfor of the principles the domestic discussed mainly ministries governments the of environment. initiatives, intergovernmental The Finally,in environmental the security within sector, framework the of regional the Regional cooperation8.2.5 in environmental areas security information, common trainings of officers reunions. andvarious has limited such of exchanges cooperation been to matters trafficking, “harder”as security rights and are notregarded as major advancements for the field. As for the cooperation in the instruments these for provisions doubletheEuropean protection the human minoritiesof and fordeveloped protection the specific ofminority Instrument aHowever,rights (CEI 1994c). such as the organizations principlesof referring other tothe directly topic,or provisionsthis on either Council of minorities,respect to most Europeanin initiatives Central and include East their documents Europe and homejustice affairs.With other and ofmigration, in trafficking, cooperation the matters the OSCE.and issues minority on cooperation the are These arenoteworthy. sectors security military One regional much Twoareas and with linkedalso are political that the thissector. within typeactivity of initiative, exceed thenumberof significantly and meetings any conferences and V4,reunions, other the CEI the even caseof in Yet, the respect. in most this been active have the Group Visegrád CEI, even and the (CEI) far,Initiative Central European So the organization. regional East European and Central some of umbrella the under organized been have fairs tourism and exhibitions 260 CEU eTD Collection CEI, the V4, the BSEC and the BC, the second includesthe includes thecategory first SECI The and the SEECP, consolidation. whiledemocratic of the regionalism and regionalism post-conflict regionalism, –reshuffle categories three into be placed might Europe, Eastern and in Central initiatives regional War Cold post that showed I chapter, previous the In 8.3 Factors and mechanisms of institutional cohesiveness level. regional and national at both weak increasingly for supporting such legitimization. However, this legitimization function seems to become national level, with the regional framework as a reproduction of national discourse and a tool is forat issues environmental interest a form legitimization of showingpolitical increased firstthe institutionalized of forms political opposition Sovietagainst Inthis rule. sense, problems and has a significant political relevance, as environmental movements have been beyond question Yet,the mere onenvironment. public awareness goes environmental the achieve notseem continuous ita difficultto does 1992,118-9) such issues (Fitzmaurice to sensitive been has traditionally that a country In concerns. environmental of relevance the level national at emphasize continue to level national at arrangement international industry heritage from Sovietthe times. Then, the Estonian invokesgovernment the itis especially easily since all accepted, republics have ahighly three heavy polluting government responsible any interest should that issue is an it Since level. intergovernmental perspective, the issue is a classic example of a two-level game. First, it promotes the own pushforBC framework 2008). From country inits to topic this some(K.S. changes at the uses government Estonian the author, the with interview an in reckoned MFA Estonian Estonian coordinates government many them of within the BC. Infact, asan in official the and by the state fieldthis areproposed initiatives inthis Most topic. the with concerned most other cases. Yet, from the documents of the initiative, it seems that Estonia is more 261 CEU eTD Collection Table 8.8Synopsisof institutional design indicators separately. analyzed been have they which on dimensions the on schemes regional the compare useful is more itto Rather, taxonomy. composite meaningful a produce to makes itdifficult arrangements the regional diversity In fact, these of features. institutional the to alsotransferred arenot categories three the fact that reveals the chapter in The analysis andpractices of institutional this design theirinternational context. dynamicthe andevolution of Central and EastEuropean regional initiatives in a larger understand to is useful difference This type. third the of example important most is the DCP STRUCTURE OF

SUSTAINABILITY SCOPE OFANALYSIS DIMENSION DECISION-MAKING resources and sources Financial Degree of institutionalization member states the initiative and the Division of powers between arrangement the within actors dominant of Number Number of areas SEECP [2] V4 [1] BC [1] dialogue Ad hoc political Operational Hegemonic One-dimensional Self-sustained 262 - - - - TYPE OF REGIONAL COOPERATION REGIONAL OF TYPE V4 [1] SECI [2] CEI [1] BSEC [1] SECI [2] DCP [3] V4 [1] SEECP [2] DCP [3] BSEC [1] BC [1] SECI [2] DCP [3] BSEC [1] framework Cooperative Consultative Clustered Intensive atal upre Fully Partially supported supported - SEECP [2] DCP [3] BC [1] CEI [1] BSEC [1] SECI [2] CEI [1] V4 [3] ĺ CEI [1] BC [1] organization Regional V4 [1] SEECP [2] ĸ ĸ CEI [1] BSEC [1] BC [1] Executive Plural Extensive ) SEECP [2] ) SECI [2] ) DCP [3] CEU eTD Collection arrangements is self-sustained. Furthermore, even in the cases in which they areonly inin they the even caseswhich Furthermore, isself-sustained. arrangements with financial respect totheirnonesources anddimension, resources as existingthe of visible mostly is This high. very still is states member the on dependence their organization, regional or framework cooperative of status the towards evolved agreements regional as for afor multilateral consultation politicalon issues. and technical Even if of some the them maintain to preferring interaction, regional of dynamic the in status higher a initiatives these grant to reluctant are countries participant the that also suggest institutionalization degreeof andthe arrangement anyoperational of lack The cooperation. increasing therefore rather an indicator of a loose form of grouping than of an evolution towards schemes with extensive agendas of cooperation. This feature of institutionalthe is design oriented politically mostly remain will they that suggests also initiatives in these countries participant the of interest low the cases, both in However, DCP. the and SECI the are These arrow. an with markedin table the fact a cooperation, intensive evolve towards might cases been modified so far. The beginninghad from arrangements very andnotthe scope rest of anextensive has The this analysis of in thesectors. many different to belong which activity, of areas range of current the acquired they first section of the werefocused more in on Group hard less yearsissues, security than chaptertwo from creation their suggests thatchanged. in Although early the theCentral 1990s, InitiativeEuropean andthe Visegrád two not has initiatives these of scope the Overall, self-sustaining. or operational hegemonic, is none that and functions, consultative fulfil them of majority the that cooperation, of scope extensive an have cases all isthat table this from observe easily one can What regionalismregionalism,post-conflictdemocratic consolidation of referring tothe [3] and regionalism whichto belongs, it with [1] referring to reshuffle regionalism,[2] referring to of wave the initiative each for indicates it categories, evolution the with correlation lack of For showing the section. of first the thefindings pagesummarizes previous Table 8.8on the 263 CEU eTD Collection BSEC but so far its voice was not frequently heard through regional intergovernmental regional through heard frequently not was voice its far so but BSEC the through only not and power its more express to aimed has region, in the actor important an once Federation, The Russian arrangements. post-conflict to the status acquiring observer institutionalizedfact through a technical Europethrough Eastern cooperation, South in particularly present often isalso Germany leaderrole. regional the play to occasionally have attempted whileand neighbours, R.F.Yugoslavia/Serbia Romania interested Bulgaria, as well from itsas Greece, neighbourhood. Turkey, Italy and Austria have been such includes from of Interestingly, actors and group Eastern the Central dominantstates Europe, it years, have in seems plural but, the last movedtype. agreementto the decisively towards technical than strictlymore focusedallthem on of the SECI, in BSEC,the DCP,and included thiscategory – the political cooperation. maybe them three of only Currently, of arrangement. type a clustered into translates Initially, the cooperation level. mostthe activeat regional pushingforward This inproposing and SEECP has been also have been of number states limited A leaders. relatively of regional position forthe compete a clustered state within the region. Yet, this does not mean that Central and East European states do not the lack nohegemonic hasThisagreement. regionalism suggests generated of a dominant new period, the of initiatives important most the were Pact Warsaw the and Comecon the of schemes where the hegemonic War, Cold in the Unlike caseof the arrangement. The most difficult to interpret is the relevance institutional regionalism. entire andEastEuropean the spaceof throughout cohesiveness Central of level thelow numberrelatively a of indicates dominantit differently, it actors put To withinregion. entire the the states to increasecommitment ordevelop across participant of the among cooperation them institutional evolution, this institutional features combination of suggests a relatively low of withthe details the Correlated resources. independent significant generate and not could partially supported, initiativesthese largely depend on internationalthe community donor 264 CEU eTD Collection became de facto second rank options. After membership was acquired, this second rank acquired,this membership was second rank After options. became defacto they plausible, became possibility this Once option. second-best a were they pending, processes. Aslong asthe possibility membershipof intheWestern organization was inbeen and auxiliaries residualproducts NATOand the UnionEuropean enlargement beginningvery the from a second granted been have initiatives these that fact be the to rankseems important status. EspeciallymanifestedCold by War post the European Central and East Themostregional groupings. in the case cohesiveness of level low of relatively the to reshufflecontributed have that mechanisms and factors of regionalism, they aseries suggests section this chapter institutional inthesecond of practices The analysisof have of the dynamic dimension of cohesiveness. sensitive indicator of the dynamic of foreign policy options in a region and thus an indicator seemsshort,be In of an spread interest. number actors the toahighly high dominantequally than in scheme the countries participant the of interestlow spread widely the rather reflects initiative in the region,with be foreign policy plural.relatively similar andproblems options tendto largest The the Central countries of arrangements small that suggest might European initiative plural a also is Cooperation Initiative is also by supported fact policy Baltic Thethe factthis variousforeign country’s programs. that a plural one. However, a for Central Europe, interest Polish alow indicates leading This role. significant particularly this yetnot have default”, a“by to seems Hungary inwhich initiative inthis least active the Poland fact, is In ofits most than decade in vocal partners. more last the beenin has general Visegrád is Cooperation a although inplural arrangement, matters foreignof policy Poland isfact the that the in ColdEqually in interesting, countries area the War post the the period. of orientation policy foreign the of reflection be an accurate to seems cooperation regional viewpoints, usuallyin orpartners for regional quality donors of Forthisprograms. reason, United the States or Union more theEuropean often may encounter one Instead, channels. 265 CEU eTD Collection dealt with in the framework issues havebeen security military and relatively political Yet, quickly, respectively. states of the NATO and EU enlargement and Visegrád the states Baltic the between cooperation the stimulated instability military process, with the theproximity Baltic highthe SovietRussia the states or regional underconditions political of to and military of onthe territory instance, cooperation. Sovietpresence For generated this further as issues regionalfirst level.accepted such wasacommon impact at goal Addressing and with (potential) threats or issues security military or political certain of existence been the such factorseems important have the period, most the to groupings area.Throughout in the Not least, there are also factors that seem to favour the institutional cohesiveness of regional phases. initial their in had initiatives regionalism reshuffle the importance political the even granted been not have they regionalism, of generation third the and DCP policy programs of countries in Eastern Europe remainsSouth an open forquestion. the As RCCisbecome whetherthe able in initiative in amajor foreign to the area.However, the politicalthe SEECP coordination definitely shifts ownership proper role balancethe towards reform brought by the creation of the Regional Cooperation Council (RCC). Granting the (Ungureanu 2003,Geoan East Europeaninteractions of have thedynamic South seem characterised partnership to and than rather regional dialogue negotiations bilateral acknowledged, interviewees my of several as time, same the At partnership. and dialogue for forums major than rather overshadowed always has Pact Stability EU-led The the results. same the yielded but SEECPstory different slightly and the SECI. Furthermore,be although agenda.the permanently seems to Post-conflict reform the regionalism isa on theysignificantly anything changed not have actedhowever, Others, Cooperation. Baltic the asof extent complementary toolsto reform. As I showin the next chapter this is the case of the Visegrád Group and to alesser attempted hassome organizations visible.status evenmore Facedwith this problem, become ă 2006).Thisbalance offorces isincreasingly changing with the 266 CEU eTD Collection acceptance among political leadership, a topic addressed also in atopic leadership, acceptance among political addressedalso next the andlast chapter. enjoy to continue discursivelevel, at arrangements regional trend, such cooperation. Despite toincreasing contributed factors inthe efficiencyof lackof All the regional confidence these goals. hindered the achievement badthe of and proposed the activities processes of design and staff, andmotivated thelack member oftrained states, of properly the interests economic and political divergent the cases, in many Yet, incentives. financial and/or economic been have there when generated been have Europe, Eastern South in especially programs, regional manifested inmanifested may Central and Eastern beEurope labelled as most often triggered by a regional or crisis.conflict For reason,this the type of cohesiveness significantnot produced impetus political results without and political impetushasbeen links itinstituted periodicas meetings among partners.However, the meetings these have the maintaining at sometimes contributed also arrangements the of design The cooperation. arrangements as a complementary or secondary room for discussion but no significant 267 reactive . Finally, many Finally, . CEU eTD Collection the European Union and the NATO remains an open question. within links political closer into be transformed to is going discourse regional this whether However, states. European East and Central among interaction much of regional characterize to continue probably will and area the in presence enduring an have to seems action rhetoric regional feature, incidental an being from far that, suggests analysis The legacies. identity regional theuseof of exception the with similar cases arerelatively two these but relevance political high has context the only Not enlargement. NATO and Union European analysis of two cases – the Visegrád Group and the Baltic Cooperation, in the context of the tofocus ona comparative thisthis Ichosefor purpose impossible, lasttopic isalmost on research Because comprehensive world. of the rest the for themselves about discourse uncover a articulate to wayin the regional groupings cohesiveness, aiming regional which concepts, as identified in chapter 5. Then, I investigate the 5.Then,investigate asidentified I inchapter concepts, identity regional previous of lines the along built are identities collective these which to extent the as well as initiatives, these within constructed been has identity) collective internal rhetoric cohesiveness. First,using cases the asin same seven Iexplore previousthe the chapter, rhetoric/discursivefinalI examineissueIn chapter, of dimension the of regional this the R C HETORIC DIMENSION OF REGIONAL COHESIVENESS HAPTER 9 of regional cohesiveness, assessing the way in which regional identity (as identity regional in which way the assessing cohesiveness, regional of 268 external rhetoric dimension of CEU eTD Collection refer to the European dimension of itsFor instance,refer to initiative, local European dimension the the despite the of character. sometimes they terms, technical in written are documents official the BSEC, the and BC the to similarly Although, different. is slightly Initiative Central European The caseof the groupingthe in also regional identity terms. However, like in the case of the of one an in 1992a). “political prosperity and (BSEC economic area of confluences” BC, such references do not aima common future, to more references BC, are the there Compared to Cooperation. Economic to justify the existence of justified inCooperation is a region for purposes the only of politicalthis cooperation, which is not any identitycreate terms. A not do they and similartreaty international acommon as in terms, technical mostly arewritten texts any discoursesituation The membership. EUandNATO goal the of achieving to respect than other with future, occursa common to references no are BC. There the of creation led the to that rationale security the orin thenarrative casejustify to areused they and regime Soviet tothe or Entente Baltic a established that Treaty of the Black on a common are onlyin 1934 the to past The references to relation neighbouringto the space. Sea a Balticthe to refer compared spatial entity a different asto member states the of territories by the area covered summits BC the of declarations political regional Neither organization. the of documents identity. official in major the any of identity regional to noreferences are instance, there for (BC), Cooperation of Baltic the case the In traditions. to these relate in areatruly the arrangements In short,all not regional in section, this show asI However, BlackSea. the Baltics, Europe, theDanubian Europe, Eastern South –Central certain identity traditions Europe, regional Baltica certain location initiativesintergovernmental to is of geographical reference reminding the WarCold regional post of all feature acommon as notice can easily one What 9.1.1 Marginal identities 9.1 Internal rhetoric 269 CEU eTD Collection are those countriestwo organizationsidentical. is membersalmost not TheCEI participate thatdo attheDCP thatitdid, themembershiphas In fact, countries. a numberof large of the similarly participant are not interms ofmembership.Although it didnotexperience the of series that enlargements the CEI the hydrologicalin Initiative European Central isthe (DCP) to similar Process Cooperation The Danube basin either. nearer Atlantic tothe not but of the Danube, Urals tothe nottoclose middle of Europe, in the lies somewhere members’ overall territory viz. Belarus,whose forum is aregional itbecause but Europe Central of tradition political and intellectual suitable for diverse,Belarus Austria ranging from to Italy andand Ukraine.Inthis sense, is thename the organization isvery membership in 7,the out Asalready chapter pointed name. the initiative, despite the notInterestingly, noneits of major documents putsforward Central the dimension European of because identity. regional to the references noother are horizon, there from European Apartthis CEI would be the successor of a certain aimed members the initiative, designof the in institutional text of terms important most tothe According by integration ideal. well dominated European the fitted newrhetorical context the CEI has always maintained much initialthe of related to rhetoric unitythe asitEurope, of future (CEI1989a).of Europe” Despite enlargements various the and the in changes scope, promote processthe of unity greater of and Europe, strengthento jointresponsibility for the amonginitiatives themselvesand makingconstructive membercountries [the wished] to “by founding Quadrilateral the declaration cooperation wideningof states, co-operation (CEI 1995, emphasis(CEI mine) recovery. or development economic forneed accelerated having greatest the those andof membercountries strengthen of advanced capacities least the to assistance [and] tofocus co-operation within the framework of the CEI in particularthe continent andcitizensof peoples all countries,regions, sharedvalues, embracing on to work for cohesiona united without of Europe, dividinglines, aEuropewith 270 CEU eTD Collection uniting and theDanubeis it”uniting (DCP2007b). The imagery to related cooperationthis 2002c). Similarly,for the Serbian Minister Affairs Foreign of “Europe is Vuk Draskovic’s integration” (DCP European at [aims] identity”cooperation andthe “Danubian European the Geoan time,Mircea that Affairsat of Foreign Minister Romanian in view of the instance, the For documents, as well as in the political declarations that accompanied the reunions of the DCP. highlighted and dimensions,These inmost the official two European Danubian, are Union: European the to another in or a way related are countries all participant that fact the emphasize explicitly document the fact, In process. enlargement EU andthe Union theEuropean to reference specific reference to Europe,a not is This 2002a). (DCP countries” Danubian the importance to great areof which either as an idea(l) process, integration andEurope European the to issues related “highlight or aimsto initiative a whole system of security cooperation, the specific sectoral the beyond founding the declaration, According to and welfare, but a democracy. to commitment political aswell location, as current geographic particular common, apart from a common river for most of the participant countries and consequently a various states cross members although is Danubedoesnot the theDCPtheir territory. short, In agroupof withmembership to like DCP,the rights Germany.Slovenia full the Czech and Republic are also differentCEI, the economicEuropean Commissionunlikein of case Furthermore, the the more recently, Montenegro. and, Federation Russian and horizons,the Stability Pact the of alongside guest country, status has the Macedonia However, Poland. Macedonia and for South which Eastern Europe doenjoy notfull seem to have much in ă help bring stability, prosperity and better economic and social cohesion to the entire the region to (ibid.) cohesion social and economic better and prosperity stability, bring help and countries process Association and in variousat Stabilisation stages the part taking countries anchored tothe the DanubianEU through othercountries, specific EU ties,member wish States,to co-operate candidates to for accession to the Union, , the DCP is composed of “Danubian states, united by … common aspiration unitedtowards by aspiration common of “Danubian DCPis … states, , the composed 271 CEU eTD Collection consciously concerned with the issue of regional identity and the potential negative legacy it legacy negative potential the and identity regional of issue the with concerned consciously Unlike inthe case previousof the four regional arrangements, postconflict regionalism is 9.1.2 Haunting Balkans no particularlink toaprevious regional identity legacy. is there connections, such Despite communism. decades of last during the written has been 1991)in remnant history Romanian national of protochronistparadigm (Verdery the which N Forinstance, nation-state. the on imagery in a particular still anchored DCPandtheir are the of advisers development some fact the as possible.in that of They suggestleadershipinvolvedalso political the the a past, asdistantthrough references to organization the with legitimizing suggest aconcern iconon Trajan’s column, Romanian of the the people”representations (DCP2002b).Such is represented Danube The existence. [i.e.Romanian] our of is asymbol “[Danube] states, 19 the in Danube of conference of the DCP, Romanian Prime Minister Europe’s cultural andidentity” civilizational (sic) (ibid.). Addressing launching the Adrian N nicheof the history, out carving throughout succeeded eachother that developments have been the oldest human settlements and the scene of all the upheavals and dramatic “for Danube banksof the centuries, the idea forward that the for example,Draskovic, puts Interestingly, the relevance of Danube is not imaginedof Europe, particularly in the new (i.e. post Cold War) context: only and thatDanube suggests in (andextension through the Danubian iscooperation) central all to space butis notonly theEUforeignemphasizing mostpolicy of furthertargets participants butgoes also in time. (ibid.). seas ofall European points crossing meeting and the both constitutes Danube region heart boundaries and its its defining in and directions developmentof The future. the its being at of Europe, newconcept of the is backbone the axis Sea-Rotterdam Black The riverbanks. its all and Europe connecting bridge natural is the Danube River The th century European economic relations, goes the farthest of all when he when all of farthest the goes relations, economic European century ă stase’s reference to the Trajan’s column may be regarded as a as be mayregarded column theTrajan’s to reference stase’s 272 ă stase, after reminding the role CEU eTD Collection 181 level hasbeen VisegrádGroup. the regional at embodiment political whose Europe Central a of restricted notion the around fall of the communist regime, the regional foreign policy the conceptSince 5. of thisin chapter country developed highlighted briefly connotations negative the all with Balkan, meant mighthave by country,extension which European be considereda Southeast pleased to inclusion Hungary of within the initiative. Apparently, Hungarian wasnot the government bythe wasgenerated SECI the and identity regional to related debate significant The only technical multilateral initiatives at regional level world.the throughout regional referencing andinthis SECIrespect the differentiate does not from most other emerges short, nosensethrough group inInof UN/ECEdocuments. less andlesseven the “Balkans”the appears After2001, federation. of process Yugoslav the the disintegration of mostlydesignate republics formerYugoslav by been the have that civilaffected warduring the documents in as employed Europe” “Southeast for mere alternative is a either “Balkans” In thesetexts, of the SECI or a 1990s. late until the “Balkans”, especially refer to SECI, administratively the which support short form for Occasionally,“Western the texts of the United Nations Economic CommissionBalkans”, for Europe (UN/ECE), in (SECI 1999). reference any group excepttitle document use this nameor the the of other which is such a as the reports of the organizationname and the Memorandums Understanding,of donoteven to justrepresented asamerelabel countries.for Some the designating documents, participant is “Southeast Europe” name butthe organization. anything of the to andare rare unrelated The official documents of the SECI refer mostly to “Southeast Europe”itself in identity. of image in about acertain terms moreregional active promoting but these references Initiative (SECI) but European Cooperative of Southeast in the case firstthe waspresent debate conveys. The the South East European Cooperation Process (SEECP) is the group On this issue,see the subsectionon theinternal rhetoric of Visegrádthe group inthis chapter. 181 Former Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs Géza 273 CEU eTD Collection (ibid.). One year later, the Foreign Affairs Ministers of the participant countries signed countries participant the of Ministers Affairs theForeign later, year One (ibid.). Europe” Eastern “South to than “Balkans” to references more find may one text entire the throughout but title in the only not was label The “Balkans.” the as states participant the 1996). ThisCooperation (SEECP of BalkanCountries the group referredof document tothe and Stability, Security Neighbourliness, of Good Balkans,established aProcess which Declaration on Relations,Good-Neighbourly Stability, inand Cooperation Security the Sofia the was SEECP the of founding document The region. the referform to to appropriate most the about a discussion also introduced (SEECP) Process European Cooperation East membership, South the about wasmostly debate the where of SECI, the Unlike inthecase consistent SoutheastEuropean dimension for its foreign policy (Nyerki 2004). was still uncertain, mighthave also contributed to the decision of Hungary to acquire amore the US had an important voiceHungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairswith suggested in a discussion with the author, respectthe fact that to the NATOinitiative enlargement, but which it may at andjoined Finally, such the accepted mighthavegenerated. that Hungary cooperation thatnot havetime done it solely opportunities benefited trade the from could have facilitation, Hungary focusmajor on trade due to these arguments.had a that of framework collaboration wasa SECI the since Second, inthearea. stability As an official of tothe have contributed viewpoint could both andpolitical an economic advanced from the this country’s participation using twomain First, thefact arguments. Hungary that more was forpledged SECI, the whichdesigned USadministration, the However, (Jeszenszky 2006). would have been states as theBalkan backward and economic perceived as political withinbeenprocess because andhaveenlargement thewould country EU the NATO a delay meant have might area European Southeast the into Hungary pushing mentally that circles political and diplomatic Hungarian the within fears been had there SECI, Jeszenszky reckons in an interview with the author that, at the time of the creation of the 274 CEU eTD Collection option for South Eastern Europe occurred in 1999, during the Romanian occurred in during Romanian forthe option presidency, when 1999, Eastern Europe South inA of the documents Turkishthe year 1998). presidency definitive following the (SEECP befound labels can two the usesof (ibid.). Similar Europe” in South-eastern reconciliation and with title “Culture the later, in a year country same the organized conference another “Democracy and on inGreece organized conference the where paragraph in same least, the Not label.this civil societyuse also states of these meetings further to all references Moreover, Europe.” South-Eastern in the Balkans” is as in this “Conferencethe Stability, document designated on and Cooperation Security is mentioned, which in forarrangement, thename regional the of Europe”is preferred also Eastern “South there is also a reference to focus: major the is Union andin withinmember whichtheEuropean framework larger states contextof the a European itis referthe appears to often, asmuch. twice to employed Europe” Most “South-east with forcooperation environmental in Instead, protection. samethe 14-pagedocument, in relation “Balkan incountries” theexpression pool” andonlyonce telecommunications Balkan Chambersand civil society of in theCommerce), Balkans”),“Democracy in 1996(i.e. in Greece held title the a conference refer of to to once five times: once in the name of an twiceorganizationfrom Infact, “Balkans”appearsonly of apart Europe.” document, title the the “South-eastern (i.e.to Associationexpress ofthe Balkans, the thisintention timeanother Declarationin on Good-NeighbourlyThessaloniki. Relations, Stability, Security and Cooperation in to establishIn this text, “Balkans” a “Balkan is less frequently used than Union to develop further its policy for South-eastern Europe in a way similar to that to of regionsother in (SEECP1997) Europe. similar way a in Europe South-eastern for policy its further develop to Union both in thefuturein developments, shaping part active totaking forward look an South- eastern Europe of regioncountries The development. social and economic andpolitical, their of part in Europe aseastern a Europe….whole…. The Europeanimportancemeasures areof for enhancing in peaceandparticular stability South- Theorientation Ministers of the Statesbuilding countries. …Theview Ministers sharethe security- confidence- that and of the region invite is an integralEuropean bytheSouth-east Union European the message to the recall The Ministers the European 275 CEU eTD Collection reflected into the representation of the former communist countries, see chapter 6. chapter see countries, communist former ofthe representation the into reflected 182 explainedin Bulgarian “Balkans” has Todorova origin Maria detail a on several occasions, democracy Z.2004). their(Petre to transition of record unfavourable rather already tothe points negativemore added such representations for EU Bulgariaenlargement, andRomania,had whichbythat time whole-heartedly opted tothe manifestedviolence warsin similar the one for during and Especially Croatia Bosnia. apotential and with of in suggested werehighlyunstable thatall region the countries it fact that tothe was related theterm with The discomfort circles. diplomatic Western many in and media in both Western the “Balkans” of the use the with ease at themselves found Atregional level,in the contextof Yugoslavthe manycrises, incountries the area not did Romania. to specific regional one and one circumstances, confirmed hypothesis the Shelinks choice. foreignof conscious with two this option policy occurred, “South Europe” Eastern to “Balkans” the from in changes these period which formerforeign in senior policy advisor staff the of Romanianthe presidency during the isversions, amore neutral Inquireddescriptor. on topicthis by Mrs. author, the Zoe Petre, various irrespective spelling its of Europe”, Eastern while“South negative connotation, hasastrong “Balkans” Initiative above, Cooperative European Southeast of the discussion choice for South the Eastern label.Europe As shown in chapter5and briefly in reminded the with respect to the way the area of cooperation should be referred to but also a conscious This evolution not only suggests initial hesitance and a certain competition of terms possible the SEECP. in but innot appeared the official politicaldocuments only of declarations some accidentally and “Balkans” all referencesthe todisappeared (SEECP1999).Since then,“Balkans” Process Cooperation EastEuropean the South to waschanged organization the nameof the On different paces and problems in the transition process, as well as on the way in which such issues 276 182 However, as American historian historian of American However, as CEU eTD Collection chapter 4. chapter Ministries of Foreign Affairs from South Eastern Europe. This arrangement is presented in more detail in 183 regard Romania aspartof Balkans.the Furthermore, asshownin further section,this the to continued have Western which organizations, or chancelleries many impressed upon other intheBalkans”(Mele responsibilities and interests with country European a “Central theviewthatthis around created Danubehas developed, Process Cooperation foreign regional Romania’s has been policy the in which context political the presenting section in the 7, chapter in mentioned already was relatedalso As tothefocus ofitsdiscontent strategy.national policy foreign particular Z. Yet,much by 2004). generated circumstances (Petre Yugoslav crises of the Romanian the regional to the related was term this with uneasiness the area, inthe countries other The Romanian government was the least pleased with the “Balkans.” Like in the case of the 2000). (Papandreou forStudies International Albanian Institute at the init anaddress Greece openly put Affairs of Foreign of Minister asformer countries,” Balkan for other “a model as perceived was longas Greece as “Balkans” the with comfortable beenalsorather has The Greekpart intervention long the lastingand with of establishing a purpose cooperation among them. foreign without thearea, of governments the of will the from had emerged that an initiative longer (Velichkov 2006).Employing organized “Balkans” awayof thus was of reminding Conferenceshave shouldin the taken no Yugoslav Bulgaria place crisis butdue to itwas Sofia apparently as a way to compensate the fact that the last planned meeting of the Balkan Affairsheld Ministers Foreign thatthe discussion was in with 1996 summit author the of diplomacy. former Furthermore, Bulgarian Kamen suggestsambassador Velichkov ina Bulgarian the to problem significant any raise not did term this of use the initially, positivelegacy in imaginary Bulgarian national the 1994, 1997).Therefore, (Todorova The Balkan Conferences were an initiative that emerged in the late 1980s as a regional forum of the ú canu 2005). However, the concept could not be easily not conceptcould However, the 2005). canu 277 183 CEU eTD Collection the SEECP has been a pragmatic initiative aiming not only at addressing various issues of various issues only addressing at not aiming initiative has beenapragmatic SEECP the mostmembership. of sense,Union notablythe Inthis states, targets participantthe European 2000, 2007e).This most “European frequently certain refers orientation” foreign to policy 1997, security stability overall (SEECP tothe and collaboration can contribute European their factthat the and orientation” “European their emphasized have continuously inlesspast. Rather,more member organic common the orrecent development the states a historic to less even and collaboration of forms previous to reference with justified been hasnot countries participant of the Thecooperation SEECP. the frequently within occurred not has identity regional of question the label, “appropriate” the for choices such Beyond papers. internal and particularlydeclarations political in the Europe” Eastern “South version for shorter be Within “Balkans” thegroup, employed to continued arrangement. presentation the asa of external the to related purposes for arebranding haverather been to seems this Nonetheless, South Process. European name Cooperation East of documents change to andthe promoted implied vision this that “Balkans” avoiding references the to in official the its chance when it initiative, held Romania and newly presidency the the took of created Balkans, that is South Eastern Europe for the rest of the world” (Roman 2005). This is why, Minister Petre Roman put it, “if we were still in the Balkans then at least they should be our regionthe thegive political Z. 2004).Asformer circumstances Romanian (Petre Prime throughoutmore more whichbesupported neutral chances Eastern Europe,” to and had was For 2005). these promoted also Romanian alternativethe reasons, the “South diplomacy principles, and “this club was an exclusivist one, close to anyone else in the region” (Roman connotations, label hadthebestin identity possibleVisegrád regional appropriated of terms already Group a restrictive Central Europe that reminded of the fundamental democratic 278 CEU eTD Collection historian, he had dedicated muchresearch historian,on Central hehaddedicated time 1980sto the during Europe, 1990s, admits much hehad that influenced been by time. as these discussions at that Infact, in early cooperation of a Visegrád main promoters the of one GézaJeszenszky, Affairs opposition circles. In an interview with the author, the former Hungarian Minister of Foreign and dissidence intellectual in the Europe Central on debates the in communism of decades last the during been had common countries three pastof the a common recall political of the beenproduce lastinghad 5, and didnot in minor rather However, effects. asshown chapter solveto theirpeaceful through disputes territorial negotiations. This14 King of Bohemia,Casimir of Anjou, of Poland andCharles III metRobert King Hungary of between the representatives of in when, threethe countries, 1335, John I of Luxembourg, reunion recall another Visegrád intended border to Slovakian tothe close Danube shores the “Visegrád” playsmajor the role. The meeting1991 in Hungariantown the of Visegrád on This vieworganic ofa iscommon past through reinforced an entireinmythology, which cooperation of Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland as follows: since thefoundingforjustifies initiative. instance, of the The Visegrád Declaration, the exists rhetoricdimension European This regionalism. War and East Cold Central of post is most developed the ofGroup within The internal rhetoric universe byfar the Visegrád the 9.1.3 The pragmatic Central Europe the area. message about apositive partners its Western to promoting alsoat but Europe Eastern South across concern high political historical 1991a) (Visegrád development. Group resulting cooperation from factof the could support basedproximity, natural on overalongof period The time, exerted influences and economic cultural mutual spiritual, thought. European of achievements the of values fundamental the embody also common of traditions.religious roots andrichcultures Thediverse nations of these heritage cultural and and spiritual contacts, mutual of shapedsystem traditional, historically their countries, these in occurring changes significant the of character A favorablebasisintensive for isdevelopmentby insuredcooperation of similarthe 279 th century century meeting CEU eTD Collection “heliocentrism,” “robot,” “e-mail,” “sugar cube,” “Rubik cube” and the “steam Ata engine.” “steam the “Rubik cube”and “sugar cube,” “e-mail,” “robot,” “heliocentrism,” includes list This origin.” Visegrád of being of considered be can [that] discoveries “inventionslist and of pagespresenta official same the Atthe time, predecessors. Nobelof list a is there initiative prize the of website official the on instance, For possible. as distant as winners connected territory to the or of peoplethatmightthe have VisegrádGroup the in inhabited it, often past connected events or achievements prestigious to references in through terms identity in group a way or another the to legitimize efforts strong notice onemay Process, theDanubeCooperation to Similarly to the elements. new Visegrádwith enriched been has mythology countries Visegrád 1991,the membership. However, since namelyEUandNATO hadbeen created, or theirVisegrád cooperation even after the partner countries achieved the goal for which their group the of existing the for rationales major the of one as maintained been has dimension “PR-image” later in chapter, this this Asshown (ibid.). heavy component adding a rhetoric them on image Western the reinforce could they that convened governments three the values, democratic and democracy on discourse times’ those influence of the under partially reasons, Partiallyactionsitbrought duringthe for also group. pragmaticto leading communism reforms that had been undertaken in these countries. Czechoslovakia’s record of civil society Poland andHungary were jointly for Western considered aid, of grounds on democratic July in1989, G7summit the instance, at For as agroup. perceive them started already theirto the Western institutions, rapprochement especially theWestern since world had to respect with promises concrete obtain them helped have could governments of three the like the Czechoslovak and Polish leaders theof moment, had understood that the joint action Visegrád belonged to his brother-in-law, the Hungarian Prime Minister Jószef Antall. Antall, logic idea (Jeszenszky thatthe Jeszenszky reckons 2006). However, of a gathering to he was therefore only not with butalsomuchfamiliarized debates the in their embedded 280 CEU eTD Collection and, once the political and military security threats diminished, have transformed into transformed have diminished, threats security military and political the once and, common political and military security haveconcerns; never expanded theirmembership; countries, the same createdaround answer period (early mainly1990s) initially to their neighbouring of number asmall between arrangements are They similar. highly been have European the Union is This and NATO. by motivated choice factors. several The initiatives to ontheirrelation focusand exclusively Group andtheVisegrád – the Baltic Cooperation the way in which presentregional themselvesgroups to world,the as or, Iframed 2, in chapter examine I the section, identity.this In (regional) a view of collective articulate internally regionalism international instances of different how examined section The previous facing enlargement 9.2 Discursive practices: TheVisegrád Group and the Baltic Cooperation was a humbug butplease publish itbecause wecan more paprika!”export Minister him, of “I timethe Education advised of reportedly whole told that the was thing Hungarian the C, Vitamin of the discoverer Szent-György, Albert chemist Hungarian the Meeting role: PR its well summarizes list this in explanation one Ironically, e-mail. an send while still escapehave inorder to Nazism)a child in might been person first the worldthe to U.S. the in family his with migrated that mathematician Jewish born Hungarian (a Kemény just a word inventedsome of itemsthese (only aclick)after suggestadifferentimage. instance, For is“robot” by a Czech novelist, givento be explanations The may misleading. life. reading However,quick such to approach while “e-mail” cube”) (“sugar aswell practical (“Rubik cube”), by a smart-playful characterised is related to the havefact beenthat there János for centuriesscientific andmanifestations (“e-mail”,“robot”) that preoccupations of significant progress (“heliocentrism”). are area there within Visegrád the that impression the with beleft may quick one reading, At the same time, the region seems to be external rhetoric external dimension of regional cohesiveness.For this purpose, I chose two cases 281 CEU eTD Collection reform in these countries, see Simon (2003, 2004). they withdrew only in 1994. For aninteresting analysis of the way in whichthis difference affected the military 184 identity. (regional) terms, the Baltic Cooperationcohesiveness: while the members Visegrád strongly legitimized their in cooperation identity never intended to developcases differ significantly with respect tothe internal rhetoric related to the group or produced a sensemore variation.of At the same time,collective as identified in the previous section of this chapter, the two is for allows choice of 1990-2007,this cases frameresearch this As thetime in of 2004. members since1999,while Estonia, Latvia,Lithuania andSlovakia becamemembers NATO membershipacquiredin EU Czech 2004. The Republic, Hungary and Poland areNATO members of full arecurrently all whose participants only are the arrangements Cooperation and Baltic the both the Europeanreached. Among all the Central andUnion East Europeancooperation has been informed mostly in relation to these tworegional targets, at least until they were and regional initiatives,on discourse that expect may one Therefore, the respect. the inthis targets Visegrádmajor the been NATO. Group All of foreign the As in policy shown principle. chapter6,the UnionEuropean have andVisegrád NATO andtroops from the territory of the memberBaltic states. also meant security In both cases, achieving withdrawal goal the primary Soviet the this of states firstfrom by gainindependence Union.security dictated needto the Soviet the rationale was the republics, for theBaltic Instead, Pact. Warsaw of the and existence the to participation the two cases. For the Visegrádhas remained their mainfocus. The initial political and military concerns slightly varied in countries, securitymultisectoral agreements,was covering variousframed fields of collaboration, thoughmainly political dialogue in relation with the The Soviet troops leftHungary Czechoslovakiaand in mid 1991, while from Poland and the Baltic states 282 184 At the same time, it meant a reorientation CEU eTD Collection Comparative Economic Studies 1996). onaverage they performed betterthan most of otherthe former communist states (Vienna Institute for “contaminationa of the past” berather may with countries the view Visegrád onof thesethe states development economic economic situationthe on view This in the first 1990). Studies half of Economic the 1990s, when oriented approachto economic service more a growth, particularlynotice may indeed One Czechoslovakiain or Hungary. (Vienna Institute Czechoslovakia as leader forComparative economic an as much as was Yugoslavia S.F.R. the respects, many in fact, In economies. communist other the to compared when picture different radically a show do not 1980s late the for indicators macroeconomic However, regimes. communist 185 a wasconsidered advanced more economically were they fact that the of acknowledgement the countries, communistformer thethree For process. EUenlargement the to with respect Nonetheless, thelogic of presenting asleadershas themselves been mostly double-edged, in Comecon. fellows their than economically advanced more slightly were countries three the dictatorship, with break up the at the time of Furthermore, states. communist former theother with compared when particularly its values, democracy and to committed genuinely were countries three the that idea the enhanced experiences These countries. their in rule communist the throwing in enjoyed muchprestige in Westernthe political, diplomatic andmedia circles due totheir role free elections. Czechoslovak President Vaclav Havel and negotiations roundtable organizing process, start thedemocratization firstto were the and Polish President Lech Walesa also liberal most its experienced a more regime of compared neighbours. to Poland and Hungary least in In principle. lastthe decadebefore the end of Cold the War,Hungary had rule. Much of the resistance 6,civil inchapter discussed active duringhad beenmoresociety the communist andstronger was based on thewas some truth in ideathis. In Czechoslovakia, Hungaryof and Poland,no for various reasonscompromise already the more advanced states in the former communistwith camp. Beyond the political rhetoric, there the regime, at identity. presented the Visegrádpartners as From group discourse beginning, this very the to with mostcomplexrespect has initiatives the discourse the Visegrád group from two the section, previous inthe dimension rhetoric internal of analysis the from observe may one As 9.2.1 The Visegrád Group Literature onthis issue usually presents the Visegrád Group as 185 283 significantly more advanced than all the other the all than advanced more CEU eTD Collection diplomatic circles at the end of the Cold War, when many visions about the reorganization of RomanMinister may it Petre havebeenanideasuggest that sprang that thewithin in the region to cooperateregionalism. However, none could indicate one or more EUtexts that requestedin the countries the early 1990s. from environment business the alikeCentral told wheninquiredabout and EastEuropean Both Geremekthe was this andfact, In coming andpeople organizations, regional the of officials ministers, foreign former thingthat first affiliation. national or Romanianinstitutional their of irrespective Primeinterlocutors, my thisthat would havebeen a suggestion coming from European the Union is held bymany of Theview 2006). (Geremek Western world” of the club of “democratic as the part accepted be to necessary credentials democratic their hence democracy, to their commitment prove could countries former communist regional the level among cooperation at idea wasthat This circles. EU from coming allegedly idea an answer to aimed partially it but government Affairs had Bronislaw theGeremek proposal suggestedthat belonged the Polish indeed to 1993, 41). However,openly denied theinterference of ECin the plan institutionalizationthis of (Vachudova in Skubiszewski anKrystof Affairs Foreign of interview Minister Polish the time, At that institutions. with the Western the stallto countries access of to inthese the initiated order proposal this EC author, formergovernmentresisted suchdevelopments, claimingin late 1992and early the 1993 eventhat Polish Minister later Czech and European 2006).Particularly the Community Czechoslovak the (Geremek of Foreign minimal institutionalisation of the political arrangement among them, even if modelled after Czechoslovak and Hungarian governments strongly opposed Poland’s proposal for a beenweakest Forthis theof all would have prepared(Vachudova 1993,46). reason, the until postponed been have could which accession, the in delay a serious meant have (Schimmelfennig 2001).On hand, as other the treating Visegrád the agroupcould states promise for enlargement, which ECcaught the political leadersa rhetorical into trap 284 CEU eTD Collection until both the new members and the EU itself were prepared. In this sense, the Czechoslovak process accession the in delaying interest EU the served have might it EU, within initiated countries Visegrád the among cooperation regional strengthening of idea the not or Whether most notablypeace, Nations. United the interaction within institutions international founded on principles to democraticrelated through arguments these of layversions with accustomed were times of those and diplomats democratic peace arguments, itis probably safe topresume that many of the political leaders Lynn-Jones and Miller(1996). 187 the partnercountries to find easierpractical solution to problems common in the region. as the Stability Pact and the SEECP, and emphasize the idea that regional dialogue and cooperation may help 186 which is corollary of this theory. likelycooperate,” aremore to states “democratic is of proposition itbecause the a reversal sphere, theory peace itto thedemocratic belongs its essence, In politics. international could prove their commitment to viewcooperationtime, regional among the level countries that formerat the communist democracy was a “free-floating regionally. cooperate to countries European and East Central encourage the idea” within the realm of of the Stability and Association Process, no major political EU documents explicitly adoption until 2005).However, the various (Roman including representatives of EC the with governments discussed Cold variantof system, thispotential War European security post the The institutionalCentral 2001). and EastEuropean (Schimmelfennig reform process members, in particularly a inwhich period Community the inwas the middle of a deep this may have been an easierand thechoice Soviet Union. for Atthe that ECtime, as forit between somecountries West within placedtheformera thirdthe communistconfigurations group did circlesnot require within the Europeanto accommodate Community European the security emerged (Geremek Roman 2006, One 2005). of potentialthe (EC), new Forgood reviews democratic ofthe peace theory seearguments, forinstance Russett Brown, (1993)and Eveninthis case, the references are mostly to the existing regional initiatives in SouthEastern Europe, such 187 Even if they were not aware of all the intricacies of the of intricacies the all of aware not were they if Even 285 186 At the same CEU eTD Collection and by common consent, the economic cooperation of the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland Hungary, Republic, Czech the of cooperation economic the consent, common by and European suchreasons For seriousCommunity. delay inintegrating the economically within would framework meanta by CEFTA free have area establishedthe strengthening the trade words, In other (Vachudova within inCEFTA 1993, 44). agricultural products of trade export subsidies andhigh barriers. tariff Such provisions seriously hindered liberalizationthe others, among meant, which Policy, Agricultural Common the on modelled was policy agriculture TheCzech CEFTA arrangements. EUand the in-between caught was frequently of CzechRepublic agriculturethe sector 393). Similarly, 1993, the (Fitzmaurice exempted weretax- arrangements pre-enlargement the which to according products, German access of inby hit severely the was market Poland products traditional of pharmaceutical Hungarian For example,the accession process. hindered EU (i.e. the frequently CEFTA)Group theVisegrád within economiccooperation the Furthermore, 2006). negotiations (Jeszenszky approachfavour forindividual not agroup European accessUnion the and did that the process was EUenlargement realizedthat the when governments the This competition grew, competition among partners. Visegrád the arhetoric This created framework 2006). (Geremek Visegrád the cooperation within further for EU push answering lesson” allegedly the pupil democratization “good the at itself asa within (Vachudova Visegrádthe Group 1993,41).Similarly, aimeddistinguish Poland to leader even asa CzechRepublic the differentiate to a strategy of part as rather may beread the Czech position out, Vachudova pointed this as reason, (European Council 1993).For criteria economic and political several fulfilled they as long as countries communist former for which the possibility documentthrough the the they enlargementof acknowledged preparing already leaders were EU the countries, European Central the of accession deny the even todelay cooperationin or theEuropeanUnion that order Visegrád was encouragingthe claimed leaders Czech later and Czechoslovak the time the by However, right. was position 286 CEU eTD Collection first major disagreements between the four partner countries. In 1994, at a summitmajororganized between countries. In1994,at four partner first disagreements the However, far from being coagulator of common action, NATO was the subject of one of the consideredmembers the first new of potential Alliance(Smith the and Timmins 2000,45-9). (Mattox 2001), Hungary, circles, strong American apparently Polishdue tothe also Hungarian partially and lobbies Poland, the Czech Republicfor NATOmembership (Geremek2006).Especially in American political and diplomatic and to a lesser extent National Advisor Slovakia Brzezinski toapply Security Zbigniew fourthe partners encouraged jointly were formerinstance, U.S. in For 1993 a group. as perceived werealready Visegrádcountries the relation with and NATO the possibly theacquiring membership. organization’s Externally, 1991a). As shown in 6,atchapter that timemostly thismeant havingleast a privileged at Visegrád Declaration, the partners emphasized their common security goals (Visegrád Group In the enlargement. NATO the in caseof the also occurred situation similar A relatively (Jeszenszky 2006, Vachudova 1993,45). insisted merits individual government eachcountry be judgedaccording that to and efforts Hungarian the accession. in a Therefore, EU the as delay wasperceived institutions formal through countries Visegrád the among relations economic of strengthening the one, (Dangerfield group closely36). Asforwhose Hungary,followed Czech economy the 2000, political the remainboth as and the economicregional cooperation ina meansto theleading Slovakia,highly isolatedpolitically and with feeble mostthe economy of four,the supported new couldbecomecooperation but Comecon afraid CEFTA 2006). that a (Geremek was otherthe end of spectrum,the Polishstrongly the government political encouraged cooperation economicthe At collaboration within supported 2000,35). CEFTA (Dangerfield political towards lesssympathetic Republic, Czech the later and Czechoslovakia instance, 393). This was also the result of the divergent national interests of the member countries. For of andframework 1993, withinCEFTA remained underdeveloped (Fitzmaurice Slovakia the 287 CEU eTD Collection landmarkin Minister Prime summit in May On Bratislava Visegrád1999. occasion,that the in did its It toredefinea rationale. so as partners, the V4needed three other targets the membership very Withwithinmembership theacquired andtheEU VisegrádGroup. already NATO the close, apart This declinehas 1999,butthat year marked after continued of adoption a new the strategy from supporting diminishing cooperationthe among the four countries,including in terms.rhetoric efforts of aswell interests, competing theindividual tothese ledSlovakiaaccess processes a as organizations to to reachthemselves the same 1998).although Inshort, forGroup initially presenting Visegrádthe countries opted as a cohesive committees (Visegrád Cross areunion V4 Red of event, lists onlyonemajor organization group action forof the group. For instance, for the year 1997, the officialthe chronology of the purpose addressedinfor joint lesspolitical subjects afterthe the V4format 1994 important were of EU was 1990-1993.significantly more In 1994-1999compared reducedduring addition, to the and NATO enlargement,usually more technical issues in period.than Infact, the previous number the of reunions cooperationthe among the partners and acknowledge simply had what been discussed, their strengthening with less concern express produced organization thatthe documents andother NATO political the oftheCzech Hungary and Poland,to declarations accession Republic, between year place of the 1994 and within framework, 1999, to take V4 the periodically membershipapplication Although for EU(Cottey politicalmeetings continued 1999b, 78). and common aformally group Visegrád the within both a closer cooperation rejected this did not but summit” having “hijackedthe of theCzechs accused Polish The three. delegation other impress the the than andpolitically economically more advanced was Czechrepublic the that conviction Czechs too for Peace(PfP), justified Czechs an individualistby Partnership attitude the the adopted much because forintroducing NATO states the in Visegrád with the by Prague States United the several months later, Václav Klaus 288 CEU eTD Collection 188 the Benelux countries and toalesser degree with the Baltic countries, taken as groups within with is cooperation increased enlargement the after also Aninteresting tendency this respect. each country seems have individualto an approach, with Poland being visible most the in where NATO, the within rare more even are V4 the of declarations Joint Union. European neighbours, commonly happensmostly framework of ThisSlovenia). thewithin the format branded (i.e. countries moremany V4+ inplus Visegrád reunions newly the andstatements activities V4 the of 2004indicateafter less significantly jointactions and reviewof the common Indeed, with accession. the finished partially mission Visegrádthe operation on current issues of common interest” (ibid.).fourlonger no partners aimed athavingjoint but statements “consultationsonly and co- In short, within the EU and NATO, cooperationInstead, withto (Visegrád 2004). the Group EUand the NATO,within respect in concept values religious thekey intellectual roots traditions” as and common diverse and cultural sharing civilization “single Visegrád the with forefront, in the education and culture placed cooperation of the content of the redefinition new when a accession, cooperation. Visegrád perceived in other Central the and EastEuropeanchancelleries as themain of purpose the foreignfor policy In purposes. way,this institutionalized they whathad been already Visegrádlabel the anassetuseful the fourwas that acknowledged publicly countries words, In 1999). other (Visegrád Group meetings regular interest, common of V4ambassadors” of issues on statements joint of arises, need the when and as issuing, and consultations PR’): between partnersthe should be “themaintaining of Visegrádthe regional profile (‘image- inmain thatthe openly areaof cooperation documentsubstantive firstparagraph the states furtherforguidelines cooperationNATO to accession after and the European Union. The presents the that a document cooperation, of Visegrád therevised Contents adopted countries For this issue, see the discussion in the section above on the SEECP. on the above section the in discussion the see issue, this For 188 This approach became even more visible after the 2004EU visible the more after became even Thisapproach 289 CEU eTD Collection framework may have had a role in this respect. positions withinCooperation that Baltic their the not indicate withindoes consultation this European Union Atlanticand the North Alliance in2004but analysisthe of their common finally joined states 2003). The three Hungary sametimeand Poland atthe (Miniotaite the nominated for thatin 1997NATOthe Madrid with summit, together Czechthe Republic, 261) andit pursued an individualistic NATO approach membership,to be hoping evento applyandPeace (PfP) forwas thefirst2001, to Rachwald aNATOfor (Mattox Partnership “Luxembourg group.” Instead, in the NATO enlargement process, Lithuania took the lead. It begin which thedecidednegotiations so-called in1997,the European to Union Baltic countries with itwave two was includedinthefirst other candidate of neighbours, the Its strategy unlike succeeded and, similarastheCzech Republic. behaving relatively Estonia advanced economically more the with countries, three the among a competition to led EUenlargement cooperation, the like Visegrád caseof inthe However, the participants. forlinks developingstrongthe among butnot access twoorganizations tothe process in their states member the among consultation for political used BCwas the enlargement, enlargementhas some similarities with evolution the Mostly, Visegrádof group. beforethe NATO and EU the to in relation evolved Cooperation Baltic the in which way The The BalticCooperation9.2.2 priorities. national different has state each where Policy, Neighbourhood European the of framework competition in foreign policy withinterms European the Union, particularly in the in be to seems partners Visegrád the actions, such beyond Nonetheless, groupings. regional different between viz. cooperation international regionalism, generation of (2004)labelled whatandtypeCostea third of towards regionalism Langenhove asthe move might secondwave the from Group sense, the Visegrád EuropeanUnion.the Inthis 290 CEU eTD Collection countries have the strongest common position when state, when common position strongest have the countries of the Conference of Ministers of ForeignisThis isthe 1993Declaration inthis respect. similar document other Only one vigorously. Affairs of the Baltic States. In this act,foundingbutalso text onein the is cohesiveness most whichthe group the of expressed the three of the three Balticformain established instrument adopting Baltic acommon Cooperation position was the the republics Moscow (which hadbeen largely by solved that time), 1990Unity the Declaration that in relation withfrom addressedtheissueof distancing and subsidiary only toEurope” “return on the the Russian mostly which focused Infact, unlike Declaration three Balticthe 1991Visegrád the states. government. acommon of stance favoured It and Union NATO European Russiathe more than that indicate is not only thevarious major treaties and political producedby declarations BCbetweenthe 1990 and2007 the of analysis The cohesiveness. BC the for factor important an played had also have may foreign1999). The withtotheRussian (Stalvant different Federation respect policy options Nordic Baltic Council having(NB8) asmore been forregarded significant all of them in whichthe republicsthree have involved, Council the Baltic of Sea (CBSS) States and the 2008). Moreover, Baltic the Cooperation has not beenimportantmost regional the initiative relations with Poland and2001, Männik Russia(Schürman 2008,Ozali developits relations with Germany, Sweden and Denmark,while Lithuania hascloser to Latvia haspreferred Finland, relations with has strong 7,Estonia inchapter discussed already As focus. policy foreign different is the enlargement NATO and EU the to respect may lack forWhat primarily with of Baltic Cooperation this the account cohesiveness of unacceptable as Abroad” of the “Near concept Russian the regard The Ministers . The Baltic States reaffirmed that any peacekeeping activity must be 291 Ƽ a 2008,Miniotaite absolutely CEU eTD Collection (1992), esp. 118-9. 190 Baltic area that would be rather inthe Russian security sphere of influence (Kobrinskaya 2001). 189 administration, three republics the signeda Baltic in Washington Atfirst Charter. this sight, American of the initiative the instance,at For States. bytheUnited particularly parties, of the Baltic Cooperation, namely that the Baltic dimension rhetoric states external in the have present is been that treatedelement asis another a groupthere by accession, NATO third Apart from the Russian factor and the occasionalinmanifested relation with sinceMoscow the1970s (Schürmann 2001, 223-4). common positions related but itwith Latviaconcerns has particularand that nuclearsecurity addsto environmental the to the EU and (Ozali Latvian security can indirectly affect that longer no large Moscow butas neighbourwith asasecurity threat a deepdomestic problems its asit with Latvia alsopartiallynormalized relations Russia, has increasingly perceived (Miniotaite 2008,160-1). Western Europe Lithuania to transitgas pipelines Russianand oil factthat enclave, aswell as duetothe in Kaliningrad relation the with special location sign mainly managedcountries,its only to aborderLithuania treaty Russia, with due to from instance, For three the 1990and compared 1993declarations. tothe positions the country with Russia haveof the beenBC prescribes different any joint and actionsmain target. Unlike in the Visegrádhave documents, neither this nor any other major or political textnotpositions. generated After as NATO with 1994, organizations, of two the members become they will that hope” the “express similarly the relations strong of each commonBalticpartners islimited “welcome” to the development of the NATO and the European Union and three the of position common the However, Union. European the and Alliance Atlantic The same document contains also provisions with respect to the relations with the North On the 1970s and 1980s Estonian actions with respect to these security issues, see for instance Fitzmaurice instance for see issues, security these to respect with actions Estonian 1980s and 1970s the On Moscow proposed the concept of “Near Abroad” as a way to justify that NATO should not extend into the CSCE. (BC1993, emphasis mine) consistentwith mechanismsthe and principles developed bythe UN and/orthe 189 292 Ƽ a 2008, 123). Estonia shares a similar view asimilar Estonia 123). shares 2008, a 190 CEU eTD Collection of international regionalism. international of developed. In this sense, the Baltic Cooperation has remained mostly within the second wave or frequent less been have they V4, to compared However, group. a as countries Benelux the with contacts increased been have there cooperation, Visegrád the of in case as Finally, Poland. to and sometimes Nordic countries Rather, tothe they are close within EU. the (ENP). Unlike the Visegrád Policy Neighbourhood European to the respect with particularly States Baltic three the Group, they do not aim among has developed Union, same European competition the Alliance. Atthe time,to within differentiate Atlantic North the within BC the of themselves positions common many not are there Yet, 2003b). as a group cooperatingin acquiring the BCformat after also themembership NATOand EU (BC Visegrád Like Group. the V4countries, Estonia, Latvia andLithuania agreedtocontinue After enlargement,the cooperation within BChas the beensimilarwithin that to the use of their cooperation. which freedom compared Visegrádthe moreenjoyed totheof with Group, to action respect act notas necessarilypushed ismajor agroup This to a theirof own difference will. (Smith in60-1, emphasisand Timmins original). 2000, were In way,this Baltic the states in area Baltic the NATO enlargement to theRussian given approach” realistic most the commercialpresenceintheregion economic and US withan established andgrowing enlargement, “EU that view administration’s US the rather expressed provisions, whichmore Baltic economic had the than convincingly argue, Charter, security political Graham Timmins as Martin and Smith However, (Mattox 2005,75). 2001, Gheciu group competition among them. On theless involving process NATOwasa of EUaccession, in case unlikethe realized that, contrary, in this respect they Lithuania and Latvia time,that Estonia, By for NATOaccession. support was anopen were encouraged to act as a * 293 * * coupled , was CEU eTD Collection Though not sodeveloped Though not in concept as the the caseof V4,of the identity regional put beenhave guardedintellectual by the dissidence and communist tothe opposition regime. in identity Central of legacy, whichtheprinciples a civilsociety Europe democracy of that regional restricted with ahighly and positive been associated have membercountries the has “PR-image”conscious andwhichdeveloped campaignthrough agroup subsequently the conscious usefor political happenedin This whichpurposes. caseof the Visegrádthe Group its probable more the imprint, the positive more the Instead, designate. they areas the within projects political regional the for non-relevant virtually and map mental collective the on marginal areboth which Sea”traditions, “Black andthe in “Baltic” the caseof the happened This for touse political purposes. them attempts map, fewerthe collective the mental the on imprints legacy identity regional the significant less the words, other In 5. chapter in identified marginality of degree the with correlates partially distribution this Interestingly, project. political its to relation in imagery regional entire an and framework identity regional complex very a built has Group Visegrád the hand, other the On identity. regional about debate been a therehas (SEECP) Process Cooperation East European South the caseof the and Visegrád(DCP) the Cooperation arecommon,Process in Groupsuchreferences while Danube the of texts official the within Instead, identity. regional to references no have almost (SECI) Initiative Cooperative European and Southeast the (BSEC) Cooperation SeaEconomic Black the (BC), Cooperation fact, Baltic the In discourses. identity regional all strong not produced suggeststhat organization regional ofthe documents official the of analysis the However, tradition. identity regional a specific to affiliation apossible geographic space,suggesting a specific to use the reference arrangements intergovernmental regional communist post all that observe may one First, case. this in is articulated of wayinwhich regional the features discourse several reveals regionalism andEastEuropean of Central practices and design thediscursive of The examination 294 CEU eTD Collection that might countries of therefore and states democratic less of agrouping many for not meant have might have been Due Europe. ready comparisonto the Visegrádthe with Group, Balkanthe regional arrangements or even which morewere visibleside when put by side with Visegrád’sthe concept of Central capable to “(re)enter” This was situations. to neutralizean attempt that“Balkans”had, the connotations negative international in other changes such for militated countries member the of some that the Western and inits documents official Europe” “South Eastern with “Balkans” consciously replaced democratic its andinterviews analysis of documents topic thisthe the that on organization revealed The (SEECP). Process Cooperation European East South the in thecaseof best beobserved can This initiatives. the among competition rhetoric acertain been has there this reason, For adaptgroupings had tothis to firstleaderentrantandmarket onthe regional brands market. other the All inclusions. further to open been not has that connotations positive high with label identity a regional appropriated has already initiative, communist post truly first is which the Visegrád Group, the factthat the mostly to arerelated attempts these However, hasbeen much used. rhetoric device history inwhich narrative this a typenational of reminding political thatthe involved elites in process the have been cognitively socialized in afeature countries, partner of the past common centuries-long an allegedly to references building national narratives. Thisin ismost visible attemptsthe at legitimization through in devices used much has inwith rhetoric also common the identity on regional imagery identity whose is diluted further by itsmembership. large Interestingly, DCP the of type Initiative, Central isEuropean the situation Inasimilar unnoticeable. relatively initiative low profileits of this activities, impossibility of appropriatingmakes space aunique the DCP identification the Europe,” “Central of tradition aspecific strategy appropriated brand already since theVisegrád could not successfullyforward by the Danube Cooperation Process closely follows the Visegrád useone. However, the same model. Together with the 295 CEU eTD Collection identity formation. identity regional and level international at legitimization political of processes of continuous the understandWar Cold European post Central and Eastand asaproduct regionalism achannel couldone thesereasons, For significantly transformed. regional initiatives the generated had that contexts political the evenafter mapcontinues mental collective the place on better of for action process this V4discursive a showed, the competition and the practices rhetoric BCand the of analysis asthe Interestingly, Nordic. most often a largercontext, to horizon todefine their because brandBalticattempted Baltic wasless the identity countries used the achieved, was this goal once However, level.symbolic at also but political at only not ThisStates. helpedthethreerepublics distance themselvesfrom to Russian the hinterland, identity brandbuilt by in hasbeen thefirst partof supported 1990s,partly the United the by the logics of rhetoric action. In the case of the Baltic group, for instance, astronger Baltic havebeen affected concepts identity marginal regional to associated arrangements regional andeven identity weighted Yet, regional such Central theEurope Balkans. conceptsas heavy long-established, with been associated have that initiatives in caseof the present itwas mostly mentioned, region. the Asalready been spreadthroughout race hasnotequally But the community.be part of democratic the recognizedto in as attempt the spaces mental better appropriate race to a also hasbeen regionalism War Cold post From this perspective, EasternSouth Europe label has been consciously promoted. policy goals of Balkan the especiallycountries, EUandthe membership NATO targets, the foreign the endangered even or delayed have might representations As such community. 296 CEU eTD Collection Yugoslav, Greekand Turkish attempts toplay a more important role in region the within the Eastern Europe in mainly In South and thatfollowed. their aftermath peacearrangements none survived the a third GreatBritain the but France,and Germany, usually Western indirectly by various powers, type of regional been had most initiatives supported of these precursors, War.World their Like Interwar initiatives bythelogic exclusively of Second the generated of regional cooperation projects ephemeral were there new Second, of war. a in eventuality signatories the the to guarantees offer certain developed. aswell themajor actors, to as of European aggressiveness revisionism increasing and the They were of threat the guard against means to asa period Interwar during the concluded agreements the resultbefore of the endI demonstrated in 4,fivechapter types of regional arrangements may be identified in area the of as fact, In the Europe. Eastern and Central in phenomenon a new not is Cold regionalism International War. First,identity. regional of traditions particular there were mayit on rely project, as a regionalist sametime, the at but identity regional produces security intergovernmental cooperation Regional and thearea. and within nation-states participantthe economic of within regional borders desirableeffects the level can action at produce intergovernmental protectionist that view the expresses regionalism international level, normative At agreements. such by regionalthrough intergovernmental andthe structuresagreements of collaboration instituted governments of more neighbouring countries. Atinstitutional level,itmay be identified central the mostly engages that process elite-driven is an regionalism international phenomenon in Cold post War Central Europe. andAs Eastern definedin 2, chapter widespread a become has international regionalism how investigated I dissertation, In this C ONCLUSIONS 297 CEU eTD Collection has contributed to legitimize precedents of War existence Coldthese of the regionalism, identity post regional discourses some actions within previousthe forms of cooperation. However, asnew I showed in chapter 9 through regionalthe analysis of the groups. ininitiativescontinueAs demonstrated communist 7,thepost chapter didnot anyof Inthese chapter 7, I Europe Eastern incould emerged notoutlive them South either. and the crisis thatit generated throughout the area, the wave of regional cooperation thathad disintegration Yugoslav of the context the Within regimes. communist the of collapse the the verge of extinction. For both ideological and political reasons, they did not survive much on andwere Warsaw Comecon the Pact the maintools, regional Union’s Soviet1980s, the of the USSR had been been slightly moreindependent than althoughpreviously thought, influencethe orpressure extremely visible might have foreign EastEuropean states Central dynamicsand suggests that the policy of during the Cold War. from influence. Soviet Balkanthe the distancethemselves sphere Such countries of Indeed, by thehelp means to a as of structure cooperation developa more consolidated to level, attempted end of the Europe. firstat again in establishedThe newinitiatives, Eastern and sectoral technical South once appeared, schemes intergovernmental afifth of regional type bloc, decreased within the of EuropecouldCentral inWhen,and Eastern late embark. 1980s, the pressure Sovietthe the countries inwhich cooperation and economic of security the shaped most decades, these four than more For (Comecon). Assistance Economic Mutual for Council the and Pact Warsaw camp: in the communist the of Warperiod Cold the initiatives regional best-known Central and Eastern Europe ended.influence in the establishmentThe andUSSR development of regionalcontrol schemes of cooperation in of the areavanished led to the creation with of the fromthe the Great Britain. However, by the end of the 1950s, these few early consolidationCold War projects uncertain circumstances ofpost war Europe. These enjoyed some external support especially of the Soviet power in the area. With this, the Western 298 CEU eTD Collection an increasing tendency to address issues from addressissuesfrom areasofsecurity,an increasing tendency to “softer” culture,the such as is there but in matters, general, security harder focus on their maintained (SEECP), Process Cooperation European East South like the Some, initially. least at a security threat), to in reaction created (i.e.one asanegative inthearea WarCold regionalism post may qualify which concerns, for hardsecurity werecreated allinitiatives (DCP), Process Cooperation Danube the exception, one With cooperation. policy-oriented more promoted have should they in which cases inthe even security, political on focus their maintained have initiatives All of cooperation. thescope or their establishment led to that therationale of irrespective of existence, especially atpolitical level.This happenedfor allinstances ofregionalism, years first in the intensive most been has arrangements cooperative regional within Activity mostly by inbeen contexts. cooperation has political certain which generated cohesiveness of forms loose ingeneral been have initiatives intergovernmental regional European East indicate thatCentral and 8, inchapter identified practices and institutional characteristics The circumstances in which Central and East European regionalism emerged, as well as the relations diplomatic and political of normalization the reflects third one the while events, regional certain to reaction a are waves two first The onwards. 2000 from identified be can agreements area following Finally, the disintegration of Yugoslavia. athirdregional generation of East European countries,conflict regionalism, developed inthe half second mostly 1990s,the of among the South as a way to manage regionalthe instability level in andthe Centraltheaftermath reconstruction of theand Cold of disappearance War. of thethe bipolarEastern logic and its institutional constrains.A These secondwere created all over wave, Europe which initiativesinnumerous developed halfof first 1990sas the the a means toadaptthe I refer and to as postlargelymore and first The in waves. three emerged arrangements newregional the that showed also they express a collective quest for security at 299 CEU eTD Collection developed increased interaction with other regional intergovernmental groupings, most groupings, intergovernmental regional other with interaction increased developed has it as regionalism, of generation third the of case first the be might Group Visegrád the 9, chapter in argued as Interestingly, regionalism. international of generation second the world. Using the terminology throughout duringsameperiod have the developed that casesof other regionalism similar to presented level.reunion Inthis Coldrespect, post Warregionalism in Central and is in Eastern Europe chapter 1, these caseswhich may sometimes theirfocus dilute and their impede beyond development the political are truly part sectors, various of from areas of range awide cover They forms of regionalism. extensive the are analyzed allthecases 8, inchapter asshown of cooperation, scope to the With respect governments to transform the negative type of cooperation intoa more positive one. common action. This of principles the concerning discussions mostly to limited are indicates activities the areas, these a low interest hasvery small. been In in matters these depth cooperation of the increasingly preferred, from thebeen have part cooperation of fields security of softer Although area. Centralthe in intervention and East European at international leasta useful asabetteror approach regarded to the tool complementary focuses on instability, of Balkan management the regional has beenincreasingly which initiative This SEECP. is the matters security political in harder profile higher a maintains Central European and East governments takepart. Theonly regional organization that which to arrangements international more comprehensive duplication the conflicting of incooperation fields these atregional level bean would and sometimes unnecessary of mostcooperation, notably the NATOandwithin the European Union. Developing forms other through addressed are concerns security economic military and the many cases, in Second, conflicting. aresometimes cooperation and economic security such asmilitary of inharder areas interests national andtheir priorities have different states East European has several Central This the for First, andenvironment. happened education and reasons. 300 CEU eTD Collection liberalization of trade sometimes conflicted with the EU provisions or created disadvantages created or EUprovisions the with conflicted sometimes trade of liberalization regional becausethe level, partially atregional a pooreconomic cooperation to contributed process also 9indicated, theUnion European in enlargement Baltic Cooperation chapter development. At the same time, as the comparativesometimes hindered by economicdivergent aswell interests, by institutionalas poor analysis of the Visegrád Group has been matters on these butcooperation framed priorities as have beenoften development and the andinfrastructure energy, transport trade, sector, economic the area. In for the stability has as of whichmembership, mainguarantor NATO the been security and perceived cooperation has been low,mostlyrelatively for fearit would impede the goal of achieving military sector, the In totheseaspects. inmany related areas arecompetitors states the most haveNATOmembership butthey have alsogenerated as tensions often been addressed and EU of goal common the and stability regional sector, political the In schemes. regional In terms of priorities RCC. into the merged have of that initiatives cooperation,regional other the with overlapping the avoids it that so (RCC) Council several Cooperation Regional created recently inthe it beaccommodated has to moment for the but issues seem area inthesetwo to form anintensive of cooperation towards might evolve thus It activities. be present inillicittransborder combating and facilitation – trade of cooperation clear directions rather most of these has developed two SECI the Similarly, arrangementoriented agenda. with anextensive it remainwill participants in apolitically that rather mostly projectthe suggests continue to low interest regionalism. of the However, the European universeof the andCentral East in initiative concentrated most the has been it In respect, this transport. on emphasis a special with in countries, member the development economic mostly on sustainable focuses Process cases might evolve towards intensive forms of cooperation. Thetwo Danubetime, Cooperation same the At Union. European the within moment the for Benelux, the notably 301 CEU eTD Collection cooperation. To address this issue, the CEI established a fundcovers of thecosts issue, that address CEIestablishedcooperation. the a this To of institutionalization the down slowed significantly that fact a all, at or in time contributions of memberEspeciallythe in could states. 1990s,some afford states not the to pay these by largely contributions are of the forms European supported regionalism and East Central projects are limitedreunions, to conferences, seminars and roundtables. At the same time, all of theirlow andmost profile havemaintained a these arrangements cooperation. In practice, institutional that might havepotentially triggeredcohesiveness afactor moreand decidedjointlyprojects by members.In havethe thistheory, might meantahigher degreeof coordinate the execution or of execute initiatives the that 3,this means inchapter defined Southeast European Cooperative Initiative – qualify viewpoint arrangementsinstitutionalof – two Central Initiativethe European the design, and as executive forms of regionalism. As I intoregionaldialoguestructures frameworks regionalcooperative or From organizations. the political hoc ad of transformation the through institutionalized more been has cooperation in which cases in the even happens This most consultations. political of forums are initiatives practices, institutional of viewpoint the From level. regional at them among ties maintain institutional loose to have preferred governments that may one observe initiatives, regional European East and Central of development institutional the to respect With actions. conferencesNonetheless,in like jointother been thesocietal sector, to have preferred industry. communist ofthe addressing thetype environmental consequences era of in mostly interested have been governments European Central the East and sector, in environmental the orresults. Finally, many projects produced haveconcrete not that meetings typeof andother reunions havebeen conferences, in fields these of activities the criminality and hasfavoured beencultural affairs most majority the largest often. However, of inmatters trans-border cooperation sector, societal In the markets. domestic for the 302 CEU eTD Collection because regional intergovernmental cooperation has been for most governments in Central governments most for been has cooperation intergovernmental regional because happened have might This plural. been has regionalism European East and Central however, In general, regionalism. of clustered several cases itgenerated but regionalism hegemonic position thewithin variousfar, regional So thishasledgroupings. any not to form of manifesta leadership to attempts into transformed interests different these Sometimes, their cooperation. have negatively affected states often of participant the interests economic and political divergent The it. favour that those than numerous more be to seem regional cohesiveness that threaten factors the moment, the for However, reconstruction. and stability, security regional a to approach regional favour might conflict international SEECP alsohindered the intergovernmental strengthening of regional cooperation. The caseof the suggests sametime, the and, at promoted and EUenlargements NATOthe question of the how showed I instance, for 9, chapter In actor. external that that to in relation have might grouping thein the participation the that advantage by the favoured be also failuremay cooperation region, the to is external actor an such When cooperation. of phases incipient the in ofparticularly the internationalactively initiative the support has also asignificantrole,leadership being essential provisions to impose regular regional consultations. The existence of one or more actors that community treaty a small extent, to and, advantages, financial and/or economic of possibility the level, regional at impact (potential) with threats or issues security military or political certain to manage of existence are the most cohesiveness favour seems to that Thefactors side. institutional the on low is relatively area in the an intergovernmentalism regional of cohesiveness the short, In levels. various at reunions than more involving projects large-scale for issue of budgets the themore significant address not and does However, this compensation provide uniquecaseismerely suchsupport. an administrative participation to its reunions for the representatives of the countries that are not able to 303 CEU eTD Collection campaign through which the group and subsequently the member countries have and campaign membercountries the been which group subsequently the through identity narrative. Asshownin 9,this chapter hasbeen of “PR-image”part a conscious complexmost regional the buthasdeveloped a certain region to in thetitle areference other instances of regionalism in this respect. It is the only arrangement that does not include mostthe striking in identityterms of regional building andhas influencedpartially all the is Group Visegrád the caseof The regional identity. about hasbeenadebate there (SEECP) Cooperation Process East European South in while the arecommon, such references Group Instead, within the official texts of the Danube Cooperation Process (DCP) and the Visegrád European Cooperativehave Initiative (SECI) almost noreferences regional to identity. Cooperation Europe),notall Eastern regional strong identity fact, theBaltic In produced discourses. (BC), South Europe, Sea,Central Black (i.e. initiatives the of in names the location regional thea reference to despite that, mayobserve one First, cohesiveness. regional of dimension Black discursive the of case in the also identified be can variations and commonalities Several Sea Economic environment. political Cooperation institutional and in elites new of the and socialization processes markets the cognitive of of emerging immaturity the by especially the process, of democratization the difficulties (BSEC)by the affected havealso been initiatives these sector, in economic the cooperation and democratization process the Southeastpost international institutionsNATO and the European Union. Yet, they also served as preparatory classes for accession to that required larger until acquired suchas inmembershipan groupings other the governments ersatz the a genuine commitment inparticipation wide Europe In institutions. sense, some initiatives regional this have been to democracy. In this the to compared policies, foreign their in importance of Europe secondary and Eastern sense, Cold War Centralregionalism isasubsidiary andEast European productofthe . Not least, as shown mostly in the analysis of the practices of practices the of analysis the in mostly shown as least, Not . 304 CEU eTD Collection camp and used as a mental initself thecommunist representdemocracy guardof as underground the had to managed shortcut the brandThe Central by sideEurope. Visegrád side conceptof with when Visegrád’s putthe concept of Centralvisiblemore which were “Balkans” had, that negative connotations neutralize the to attempt Europe. Although countriesinitially an Themember also initsEurope” Eastern documents. “South “Balkans” with official replaced militated thisconsciously andtheinterviews revealeddocuments organization topic the on that for such its of The analysis (SEECP). Process European Cooperation East South the case of changesin the best observed be can This initiatives. the among competition rhetoric in acertain been otherhas there reason, this For market. brands the on internationalleader market and entrant first this to adapt to had groupings other the All inclusions. further to open been not has that connotations situations.initiative, a communist hasalready appropriated regional label identity high positive with This was post truly first which isthe Group, Visegrád the fact that tothe are related legitimization an of attempts these DCPsuggested, the inof involved thecreation ranking officials narrative in which rhetoricthis device has been much used. As interviewsthe with high- involved have in socialized process the in been cognitively a type history national of political elites the may bethat for thefact this feature A explanation years.of possible thousands and hundreds on stretches that countries partner the of past common allegedly an to references through legitimization at attempts the particularly mention should one respect, has much in common with rhetoricthe devices inused building narratives. national In this closely follows the Visegrád one. Interestingly, the DCP type of imagery on regional identity Process Cooperation Danube the by forward put identity regional of concept the V4, the of dissidence andopposition communistto the Though sonotdeveloped regime. asin casethe in Central the Europe which principles have of democracy intellectual been guarded by the associated with a highly positive and restricted regional identity legacy, that of a civil society 305 CEU eTD Collection notable case is the Visegrád group, which justified this restriction in identity in whichframingnotable justified this identity restriction caseis terms, Visegrád group, the initiativeshave Themost membership. that restricted Finally, are theirassociates. there international prestigious seeking actively of them Council, all Regional Cooperation created of the Black Sea Economicyears.in last has visible beeninitiatives a increasingly the instance Thisisfortrend the case Cooperation,available. In fact, associatingthe (prestigious) internationalDanube organizations to the regional Cooperation are perhaps international organizations, members, new limit except regional and noother Process a andenlargement, havereached whileopen to arrangements, inthearea.Others regionalism the newlyof cohesiveness the hampering further factor a dimension, European the and localism between in are caught tension the Europe Eastern and inCentral organizations regional This identity problemorganization the framedespite to attempts asa itself regional yet initiative. European-wide with which the the to identity any create regional managed to it hasnot extentthat the to enlarged been CEI has been confronted institutional members, has mostly Some,like European Initiativedesign. theCentral through suggests that open to other therearegroups First, identity practices. and institutional these through some of the As already hinted above, one can identify several types of community that are promoted be recognized aspartofthe democratic community War regionalism beenhas alsoaracetoappropriatebetter mental spacesintheattempt to From label Europe hasthis perspective, promoted. Eastern consciously been South policy goals of Balkan the especiallycountries, EUandthe membership NATO targets, the foreign the endangered even or delayed have might representations As such community. democratic theWestern to “(re)enter” even havecapable or notbeen ready might have meant for manymight arrangement regional aBalkan contamination, By in collective. mental the “Balkans” a grouping of less late 1980s to the hadinclusiveCentral strongly opposed inthe concept, become Europe democratic states and therefore of countries that 306 . post Cold CEU eTD Collection security and economic regionalism Soviet-led Europe, Eastern in South Waralliances of region, security mostCold the early in most of the forWorldWar the entireprotectionist region, throughout projects arrangements region, Second and late Cold War in thearea:Interwar international regionalism of five types were distinct there War, technicalCold the of and end the before above, mentioned already As cooperation. intergovernmental of Central and EastEuropean regionalism,identifieddifferent eight categories I of regional specificcase the to With respect contributions. make other Ialso in dissertation Europe, this Eastern and Central War Cold in post regionalism international of development the most informed action have democraticfrom conditionality and rhetoric Apart demonstrating that phenomenon. political market-oriented a also is it but events international by prompted is withinfriendship international notonly by regionalism andregulated security concerns be first in the buyer. marketbutfirstthe on themindof Inthissense,the the politics of Central This Europe. confirms an marketing old whichlaw according itis to important not to with in relation map mental collective the on existent concept identity regional positive most isidentity brands which the market Visegrád Group, beassociated with was firstthe to the regional the on leader the Yet, area. the in regionalism of wave second the to belonging arrangement first the initiated also They Europe. Eastern and inCentral states of group other Balkan countries had a longer history of regional intergovernmental cooperation than any than producedthroughpoliticalexample,in interaction.those For asIshowed 4,the chapter At samethe time, hierarchies yielded by rhetoric action seems tobe moreoften important regionalism. international European East and Central in role a have to continue will action rhetoric and issues identity regional that expect may one Therefore, cooperation. a new andmore infusion ofidentity complex in on elements discourse the Visegrádthe emphasized mainly in the 1990s.in Nonetheless, asargued chapter 9,recently hasbeen there hasbeen of communities the “organic” character The terms. in organic cooperation the 307 CEU eTD Collection essentially different from other types of international organizations. In the academic Inthe organizations. international from types of other different essentially internationalfound law,considered I of regional arenotperspective that public organizations the on topic. From the literature in academic and international relations of practice thisframework, Ianalysed conceptual nature ofinternational the regionalism as defined in butan product only establishing After anideological is identifiable regionalist not project. except typesthe in regional which,Iargued, integration, of literature, discussed regionalism all cover four categories These separatism. regional and regionalism autonomy regionalism, international cross-border only of regionalism, regionalism: produced four categories This reconstruction space. neighbouring the of from rest the asdifferent represented and its related field of startingregionalism concept the I reconstructed this reason, For overlapping. frequent is there that from the concept andIshowed concepts, of related the and forof thenotion regionalism in literature the existent region, which I definedmeanings various mapped the I part of dissertation, firstthe Inthe research. for other be used as an area that is Ialso empiricalfindings, Beyond these several thatcould developed conceptual categories catalyst but not a forerunner of the Central European Initiative (in its Quadrilateral format). mostmay have a beenat (AAWC) Community Working AlpsAdriatic the topicthe claimed, most scholarship on unlike what that, argued for Ialso this research, interviews conducted sources such as official todocuments be the first positive attemptand seems which politicalto consolidation, cooperate democratic of regionalism the and regionally Yugoslavia; of disintegration declarations in the area. On the basisviolent the of after first Europe of hand Eastern South the of moment,reconstruction and stability the manage as well as of means to asa regionalism created conflict system; post bipolar of the by disappearance the issues hardmostly security generated answer to in attempt an halfestablished 1990s of the fist in the regionalism be may reshuffle added: of regionalism categories other three period War inCold five To these the post then Eastern types, Europe. inSouth dialogue political 308 CEU eTD Collection proposed as in an wasdefined integration/interdependence paradigm, proposed to alternative the I which This concept, “regional cohesiveness.” to makesrespect iswith dissertation this that contribution important most the developments, conceptual of terms in Nonetheless, evaluating the institutional strength of regionalthe groupings Ianalyzed. sustainability.its as well as states, member the with in relation and arrangement regional the within power of structure the scope, goals, the the are features These for their cohesiveness. relevant On each thatare initiatives intergovernmental of regional theinstitutional characteristics includes of theseinternational didfollowingregionalism I that designed 3.This agrill I that inchapter grill dimensions, of cases these of design institutional the of analysis an by preceded was analysis I institutional Cold practices Warpost of Central and EastEuropean regionalism. This developed analysisthe of for across-sector ofsecurity sectors fivebetween used theirdistinction taxonomies specifically, More I so-called Copenhagen. of his atthe School Barry colleagues Buzan and and in I conceptually literature, security the for opted developed by the paradigm thatdeveloped I useddimensions. In this dissertation, I focused on thefor security dimension, which is also the most elements. However, for analysis purposes, one may choose to focus only on one of the four aspects of the same phenomenon because contemporary regionalism manifests all these four different asthe field or of asa continuums rationales political and as well as the policy the second wave of regionalism, Iproposed to represent the security and welfare dimensions, between policy- and politically-oriented initiatives. For abetter description of the cases from an dichotomy which additional generates isthedistinction economy-politics, inappropriate particularly late 1980s), since the has developed that (i.e. regionalism of wave second called properly the universe of contemporary regional intergovernmentaldescribe not cooperation. do and logic bipolar For in the the so- embedded heavily still are regionalism international forms of differentiate between different to used existingcategories I foundthe that literature, 309 CEU eTD Collection European international regionalism, identifying the previous forms of regional of forms previous the identifying regionalism, international European 4 and 5,Ipresented the institutional and discursive backgrounds of Central and East chapters In theentiredissertation. within of argumentation the structure determined also the of This in postulated regional cohesivenessthe concept (Figure 1). structure introduction the normative-representational withdimensions four strata the meaningof production I that and institutional the of combination the to correspond layers eight These phenomena. identitycohesiveness because help specific they establishing the political, socio-historical and location the four elements these Icalled background. discursive of a particularregional institutional groups.Atthe other same regionaltime, Irepresent ascohesiveness developingina andgrouping with in relation socio-political them situating helping thus group, aregional of specifics the describe they context, within as well as on a certain the institutional ensemble and of political and social world. I called these four aspects the aspects four called these I world. practices implemented, and are objectivesof goals, andprograms regional the grouping assessed is that of with practices, of is that assessed can beleveljustifyThe tothemselves which theirgrouping).products the second on and through the interaction of its members) and members) its of interaction the through and design. Here, one looks at the level interaction. may first political be The on products which assessedis these of that of products processbuttothe the refer not to itdoes which that means concept, oriented can be is these lines. From along assessed its cohesiveness an-output design, regional and dimensions material/institutionalandnormative-representational both cohesiveness has In representthemselves lineand/or space actregional asagroup. social constructivism, with which 2as chapter limited inhabiting degreeto a group the of a contiguous social actors (or external rhetoric ) referring to the way in which the group presents itself to the to itself presents group the which in way the to referring ) institutional design institutional practices situational layers 310 (the structures instituted (the by structures for group the internal rhetoric representing the way in which the in which way the representing of regional of because cohesiveness regional locational layers (the way the members of regional discursive CEU eTD Collection particular case of international international case regionalism. of particular only opened this new direction of research, addressing the issue of regional cohesiveness I in a dissertation this in Nonetheless, relations. international of study the to limited one only as reason, regional a politicalbe understood cohesiveness should science andnot concept For this autonomy. separatism and include 2,these regional in As chapter created. argued regional action, political of in terms others from cohesiveness distinct remain and develop areas certain which is asa generalthe cases of categoryregionalapplicable international notonly to butto regionalism categoriesother of such regionalism, separatism applicable may be that isconcept cohesiveness and a doso. Finally, regional has to attempted that regional toscholarship the of agenda allcritical the without autonomy. regionalism, international cases to constructivism Sincein which it describes social itaccommodates is that cohesiveness of regional the regions advantage Another arguments. the wayare in paradigm and inthis notionrespect the is mostly useful (neo)liberalistto and institutionalist 2,regionalas may in discussed bewithchapter cohesiveness congruent integration the time, At same integration. the and interdependence of ideological those aslessthan regarded may concept be the isreason, Forthis itself nocohesiveness. there then as group, represent act doesnot or of actors When a group is falsifiable. it interdependence, or integration unlike First, of regional of concept the cohesiveness. There areseveral advantages second. representational normative- the and first dimension institutional the with cohesiveness, regional of layers situational the analyzed I chapters two last in the evolved, and emerged regionalism of case particular in which this circumstances 7the inchapter presenting after Finally, socio-politicalinCold context post which Warregionalism hasdeveloped area. in the showed whichwasthe 6,I Inchapter inpresentEurope. with relation Central and Eastern legacies identity regional important themost aswell as cooperation, intergovernmental 311 USSR (1922-1991) R. Albania (1963-1992) Yugoslavia S.F.R. R. Bulgaria Romania R. Hungary (1919-1993) Czechoslovakia R. Poland Instances of Central and East Europeanregionalism (asof 2007) Appendix 1 A Georgia (since 1991) (since Georgia 1991) (since R. Azerbaijan 1991) (since R. Armenia 1991) (since Ukraine 1991) Moldova(since R. 1991) (since Belarus 1991) (since Federation Russian PPENDICES R. Slovenia (since 1991) (since R. Slovenia 1991) (since R. Croatia 1991) (since Macedonia /R. F.Y.R.O.M. 1992) (since andHerzegovina Bosnia 2006) (2003- Montenegro and Serbia / (1992-2003) Yugoslavia F.R. 1993) (since R. Slovakia 1993) (since Czech Republic R. Serbia (since 2006) (since R. Serbia 2006) Montenegro (since R. Kosovo / UNIMK (since 1999) (since UNIMK Kosovo /

CEU eTD Collection P 1988 AAWC 1978 PF F* F* 1990-1993 2000-2006 2000* 1990* 1990* 1995 1996 1995 1994 1992 1992 1993 1992 2006 1995 1995 1991 1989 CEI F F 1990 BC F-1993 1991 V4 F* F* F F 1996-2004 1999-2007 1997-2007 1994 (r) CEFTA F - 2004 F*-2004 F*-2004 F-1993 F-2004 2007 2007 2003 2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 1991 2004-2006 BSEC 312 2006 1992 O O O O O F F F F F F F F F CBSS 1992 O F F 1992 NB8 2000 1996 Q4 F F SEECP 2006 2005 2001 2007 1996 F* F F F F F GUAM 1996 F F F F 2000-2006 2000* SECI 1996 O O O O F F F F F F F F F 1999 SP M M M M M M M M M O S S S S S S 2000 AII F* F F F F F 2002 DCP F* G F F F F F F F F F F F UNIMKInterim Nations– United Administration Mission Kosovo;in Visegrád Group – V4 QuadragonaleCooperation (previously known Trilateralas cooperation of Italy, Hungary and Slovenia); SECI – Southeast European CooperativeInitiative; –South SEECP East European Cooperation Process; SP –Stability for Pact South Eastern Europe; European Initiative (previously as known Quadrilateral, Pentagonaland HexagonalCooperation, respectively); DCP–DanubeCooperation Process; GUAM –Group ofGeorgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan andR. of Moldova;Baltic NB8–Nordic Q4 Council – – Alps-AdriaticAAWC Community; Working AIIIonian Initiative; – Adriatic Cooperation; –Baltic BC Black BSECSea – Economic Cooperation; CBSS of – Councilthe Baltic Sea States; CEFTA Free– CentralEuropean Trade CEI Agreement; – Central Legend SP Commission European Iceland Norway Switzerland Turkey Greece Italy Austria Germany Finland Denmark Sweden G O F R. Latvia (since 1991) (since R. Latvia 1991) (since R. Lithuania 1991) (since R. Estonia 1991) (since Uzbekistan EFTA members EU Oldmembers EU members New Guest Observer Founding member CIS members EU potential candidate countries EU candidate countries S M P Supporting partners Member partners Member through oneorseveraladministrative units CEU eTD Collection PF 1978-2005 P1989-1997 PF PF F F F F F Regional cooperationinitiative Internationalorganizations or institutions NationsInterimUnited Administration Mission Kosovo in (r) * 313 O O O F F Year ofratification by the founding (ifdifferentmembers fromthe year ofcreation) another of Member assuccessor state F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F 1999-2005 O O O F F S S S S S S S S S S S S S S F F F F F F F CEU eTD Collection member Founding Southeast European Cooperative Initiative (December 1996) Black Sea Economic Cooperation (June 1992) Central European Initiative (November 1989) Evolutionof membership of Central and EastEuropean (1989-2007) Initiatives Appendix 2 independence after membership continued its that entity) state of another member(as part Founding Turkey Slovenia Serbia Romania Moldova Macedonia Hungary Greece Croatia Bulgaria Bosnia-Herzegovina Albania independence after membership reacquired its that entity) state of another member(as part Founding independence after membership discontinued its that entity) state of another member(as part Founding Ukraine Turkey Serbia Federation Russian Romania Moldova Greece Georgia Bulgaria Azerbaijan Armenia Albania Ukraine Slovenia Slovakia Serbia Romania Poland Montenegro Moldova Macedonia Republic Czech Croatia Bulgaria Bosnia-Herzegovina Belarus Austria Albania 314 South East European Cooperation Process (July 1996) New member Baltic Cooperation (May 1990) Visegrád Group (February 1991) DanubeCooperation Process (May 2002) independence after membership continued its state entity) that part of another New member (as Slovakia Poland Hungary Republic Czech Lithuania Latvia Estonia independence after membership discontinued its state entity) that part of another New member (as Turkey Serbia Romania Montenegro Moldova Macedonia Greece Croatia Bulgaria Herzegovina Bosnia- Albania Ukraine Slovenia Slovakia Serbia Romania Moldova Hungary Germany Republic Czech Croatia Bulgaria Herzegovina Bosnia- Austria CEU eTD Collection in 1993.in 1 Slovenia Slovakia Serbia Romania Poland Montenegro Macedonia Lithuania Latvia Hungary Estonia Czech Republic Croatia Bulgaria Herzegovina Bosnia- Albania and economic organizations (asof 2007) Membership of Central and East European countries to themain European security Appendix 3 Czechoslovakia was member of the CSCE since 1973 until it separated into the Czech Republic and Slovakia and Republic Czech the into separated it until 1973 since CSCE ofthe member was Czechoslovakia CSCE/OSCE 1993 1993 1992 2000 1973 1973 2006 1995 1991 1991 1973 1991 1992 1973 1992 1991 1 1 Council of 315 Europe 1993 2003 1993 1991 2006 1995 1993 1995 1990 1993 1996 1992 2002 1995 1993 1993 Partnerstate Partnerstate Partnerstate NATO 2004 2004 1999 2004 2004 1999 2004 2004 2004 1999 European Candidate Union country 2004 2007 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2007 2004 2004 CEU eTD Collection 1994 1992b 1992a (BSEC) Cooperation SeaEconomic Black 2005b 2005a 2004 2003d 2003c 2003b 2003a 1994b 1994a 1993 1990 Baltic Cooperation (BC) 2006b 2006a 2005 2004 1978 Alps-Adriatic Working Community (AAWC) 2000b 2000a Adriatic-Ionian Initiative (AII) 1. Official documents, instruments andpolitical declarations A. PRIMARY SOURCES R EFERENCE LIST Agreement Establishing the Black Sea Trade and DevelopmentJune. 25 Bank, Tbilisi. Istanbul, Statement, Bosphorus The Summit Declaration on Black Sea Economic Cooperation, Istanbul, 25 June. Regulation for the Committees of Senior Officials and Task Forces. Baltic Council of Ministers, Kuressaare, 28 September. Chairman’s conclusions at the Meeting of the Prime Ministers’ Council of the Report on activities of the Baltic Council of Ministers. Latvia and the Republic of Lithuania, Vilnius 28 November. governmental and parliamentary Baltic the on Agreement the amending Protocol cooperationJanuary. 15 Kalvi, between States, Baltic the of Ministers Prime the of theCommuniqué Joint Republic ofJoint Statement of Estonia,the Prime Ministers of the Baltic States, Kalvi, 15 January. theNovember. 28 Vilnius Republic Ministers, of Council Baltic the for reference of Terms ofAmended Lithuania, Tallinn, 13June. Republicbetween the Estonia,Latvia and of the of Republic the Agreement on Balticthe governmental parliamentary and cooperation Tallinn, June. 13 of forMinisters, theBaltic Council of Terms reference Tallinn,States, 6December. Declaration of Latvia and RepublicLithuania, of Tallinn, 12 May. of the Conference by DeclarationCooperation of Republic Estonia, Unity Republic the and on of Ministers of Foreign Affairs Chronology 2006, http://www.alpeadria.org. of the Community, 23November. Baranya Baltic Organisational and procedural rules of Alps-Adriaticthe Working Chronology 2005, http://www.alpeadria.org. Chronology http://www.alpeadria.org.1978-2004, 20November. Venice, Declaration, Joint November. Rules of of Adriaticthe Procedures and Council, Zagreb,24 Ionian and the Ionian, Ancona, 20 May. Declaration of the Conference on Development and Security in the Adriatic 316 CEU eTD Collection 1994b 1994a 1993b 1993a 1992c 1992b 1992a 1991b 1991a 1990d 1990c 1990b 1990a 1989b 1989a (CEI) European Initiative Central 2007 1999 1998b 1998a 1997 1996 1995 and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Czech Republic, F.Y.R. of F.Y.R. of Macedonia, Czech Republic, Croatia, the and Herzegovina, Bosnia Austria, Albania, of Affairs Foreign of Ministers the of Declaration July. Hungary,Italy, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine, Trieste, 16 of Macedonia, F.Y.R. Republic, Czech the Croatia, Bulgaria, Herzegovina, DeclarationSlovakia andSlovenia, 17July. Budapest, Croatia, of the theDeclaration of the Heads of GovernmentHeadsCzech of Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republic,22 March. Budapest, of Government F.Y.R. andmembership Initiative Republic of onthe Republic, the Slovak Czech the of Macedonia, European Central of the Affairs Foreign of Ministers the of Declaration of Hungary,Initiative,Austria, Graz, 21 November. Italy, European Central of the Affairs Foreign of Ministers the of Declaration Poland, Belarus,and Slovenia, Vienna, 18July. Poland Italy, Hungary, Republic, Federal Slovak and Czech the Croatia, BosniaDeclaration of the Heads of Government of Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina,and 21March.Klagenfurt, DeclarationPolitical Declaration of Hexagonal the Summit, Dubrovnik, 27July. of the MinistersPentagonal Initiative, Bologna, 18 May. of DeclarationForeign of the Meeting of the Ministers of Foreign AffairsAffairs of November. Rome, 30 the of theDeclaration Hexagonal Initiative, 1August Venice, of theInitiative, Ministers by of Policy adopted Headsof Pentagonal the document Governments the of ForeignVienna, 27May. Affairs of Initiative, of Pentagonal the Ministers Prime Deputy of the Declaration the PentagonalMay. Initiative, Socialist Czechoslovakia,Republic of Federal andYugoslavia Vienna, 20 Declaration of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Austria, Hungary, Italy, the and the Socialist FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia, 12 November. Budapest, Joint DeclarationNovember. 11 Budapest, Yugoslavia, Federal Italy Republic of and theSocialist of the DeputyJoint Declaration of the Ministers Primeof Foreign Affairs of Austria, Hungary, Ministers of Austria, Parliament. European the Hungary,Black Sea Synergy,Italy Communication from November. the 17 Commission Istanbul, to the CouncilDeclaration, andSummit June. 5 Yalta, Cooperation, SeaEconomic Black the of of Organization the Charter SummitDeclaration, 5June Yalta, 1998. 7 February. Declaration of Intent for the Establishment of the BSEC Trade Area, Istanbul, 25 October. Moscow, Cooperation, BlackEconomic of the Sea States Moscow Declaration of the Heads of State or Government of the Participating 30June.Bucharest, Statement of the High Level Meeting of the BSEC Participating States, 317 CEU eTD Collection 2002a 2001 (DCP) Process Cooperation Danube 1992b 1992a Council of the Baltic Sea States 1994 2005a 2003 2000 1999 1998b 1998a 1996b 1996a 1995 1994c 1992b 1992a 1990 inEurope (CSCE) and Co-operation for Security Conference 2005c 2005b Vienna, 27May. Process, Co-operation Danube of the Establishment onthe Declaration Concept paper, Foreign Ministry of Romania, December. Business conference within the context of the Danube Cooperation Process: March. Terms of reference for the Council of the Baltic Sea States, Copenhagen, 5-6 States, Copenhagen, 5-6 March. Declaration of the Conference of the Foreign Ministers of the Baltic Sea December. 21 Budapest, SummitDeclaration, Report 4 the on Report on the Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia andUkraine,Budapest, 24November. 6 of F.Y.R. RepublicMacedonia, Hungary,Moldova, of Italy, Poland, Republic Federal Yugoslavia, of Republic, Croatia, Czech the Herzegovina, Declaration ofthe GovernmentAustria, Albania,the Heads of and of Bosnia Karlovy June. Vary, 24 States, Statement on Kosovo of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the CEI States,Member Brijuni, 6June. Statement on Kosovo of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the CEI MemberMember States, Brijuni, 6June. Final Document of the Meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the CEI Ukraine, Graz, 8 November. Italy,Moldova, Slovakia,Republic Poland, Romania, and Slovenia of Hungary, of Macedonia, F.Y.R. Republic, Czech the Herzegovina, Croatia, and Bosnia Austria, of Albania, Government of Heads the of Declaration June. Hungary, Romania, Italy, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia andUkraine, Vienna,1 F.Y.R. of Macedonia, CzechRepublic, Croatia, the and Herzegovina, Bosnia Austria, Albania, of Affairs Foreign of Ministers the of Declaration Warsaw,7 October. Initiative, European Central the of Procedure of Activities Rules and for Guidelines CEI Instrument for the protection of minority rights, Turin, 19 November. November. 18 Ukraine,Turin, and Romania, Slovenia Hungary, Slovakia, Italy, Poland, Helsinki Document:TheChallengesofChange 21 March. Vienna on Confidence- Document and Security-Building Measures,Vienna, Paris,November. 21 New Europe, for a Charter June. 24 Trieste, Development), Report June. 24 Trieste, on Development), the 6 6 the on Report June. 24 Trieste, Development), th th Conference on CEI Co-operation,Trieste, 15 May. th Conference on CEI Co-operation, Cluster onCEICo-operation, Conference 3(Institutional th Conference on CEI Co-operation, Cluster 1 (Economic Conference on CEI Co-operation, Cluster 2 (Human 318 , Helsinki. , CEU eTD Collection 2001 1999 1996b 1996a (SECI) Initiative Cooperative European Southeast 1999 1994 1991 1949 (NATO) Organization Treaty Atlantic North 2001 1997 1996 Group of Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova (GUAM) 1999 Other documents 1999 1996 Council oftheEuropean Union,Affairs General (EU GeneralAffairs Council) 1999 Council of theEuropean Union 1995 1993 European Council European Union (EU) 2007b 2007a 2004 2002c 2002b launching conference of Process, conferenceof Vienna,launching 27May. Danube Cooperation the Report of the SECI Agenda Committee, Sarajevo, 25 May. transport of goods inroad the SECI region, Athens, international of 28 April. facilitation the on Understanding of Memorandum December. Southeast European Cooperative Initiative Statement of Purpose, Geneva, 6 Points of Common EU-U.S. Understanding, 31 October. The Alliance’s Strategic Concept, Washington, D.C., 24 April. January. 11 Invitation,for Peace Brussels, Partnership The Alliance’s Strategic Concept, Rome, 8 November. North Atlantic Treaty, Washington, 4 April. June. Yalta, 7 GUUAM Charter, Ukraine, Strasbourg, 10 October. Joint communiqué of the Presidents of Azerbaijan,Georgia, Moldova and Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, Vienna, 14 March. Statement of the OSCE Security Model Committee of the delegations of of Assembly, Memorandum by Union for European the the 54th United Nations General Session 2186, 31May. Session 1903, 26February. Decision 1999/361/CFSP,31 May, OJL141,4 June 1999,p.1 Presidency Conclusions, Madrid, 16 December. Central Copenhagen,and Eastern Europe, 12-13June. Conclusions of the European Council on relations with the countries of Belgrade, 18April. at the 3 Openingby statement Vuk Draskovic,Ministerof Foreign Affairs of Serbia, Cooperation Belgrade,Process, 18April. Final Document of the Third Ministerial Conference of the Danube Cooperation Bucharest,14 July.Process, Final Document of the Second Ministerial Conference of the Danube conference of the Danube Cooperation Process, Vienna, 27 May. Address byMirceaGeoan Address Speech by Adrian N rd Ministerial Conference of the Danube Cooperation Process, ă stase, Prime Minister of Romania, at the launching ă , Minister of Foreign Affairs of atthe Romania, Affairsof of Minister Foreign , 319 NATO Review NATO 42. CEU eTD Collection 1999b 1999a Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe (Stability Pact) 2007e 2007d 2007c 2007b 2007a 2006 2004 2002 2001 2000b 2000a 1999 1998 1997 1996 (SEECP) Process Cooperation European East South 2006 2004 participating andfacilitating countriesof Stability the andPact the Principals Summit Declaration of the Heads of State and Government of the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe, Cologne, 10 June. Zagreb,2March. Cooperation Process, European JointStatement of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the South East Process, Zagreb, April. 12-13 of Interiorthe andof Public Order of East South the EuropeanCooperation Europe, Final declaration of the Meeting of Ministers of Justice and Ministers Standards of the European Union and the Rule of Law in South Eastern May. Stability, Security and Cooperation in South Eastern Europe), Zagreb, 11 Cooperation (Annex CharterProcess onGood-Neighbourlyto the Relations, mechanismsProcedural aspects andfollow-up European of the South-East and Cooperation in South Eastern Europe, Zagreb, 11 May. Protocol to theCharter onGood-Neighbourly Relations, Stability,Security Cooperation Process, Zagreb, 11 May. East European South the of Final Acton enhancement the Zagreb May. 4 Thessaloniki, Process, Heads of and State Government of South-Eastthe European Cooperation of the Ninth Meeting of the Declaration Thessaloniki in Europe”: “Together April. countries of the South-East European Cooperation Process, Sarajevo, 21 Sarajevo Declaration: Meeting of the Heads of State and Government of 28 March. Tirana, Process, Cooperation East European South Summit Declaration of the Heads of State and Government of countries of European countries, Skopje, 21February. Summit Declaration of the Heads of State and Government of the South-East February. Stability, Security and Cooperation in South Eastern Europe), Bucharest, 12 Cooperation (Annex CharterProcess onGood-Neighbourlyto the Relations, mechanismsProcedural aspects andfollow-up European of the South-East inEastern Bucharest, Europe, South 12 February. Charter Good-Neighbourlyon Security Stability,Relations, and Cooperation December. 16 Bucharest, Joint declaration of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of South Eastern Europe, Istanbul, 23June. Joint declaration of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of South Eastern Europe, Cooperation in Balkans,the Thessaloniki, 10June. Declaration on Good-Neighbourly Relations, Stability, Security and Cooperation in the Balkans, Sofia, 7 July. Declaration on Good-Neighbourly Relations, Stability, Security and Thessaloniki. brochure, presentation network SECIPRO Bucharest. Report of the SECI Regional Center for Combating Transborder Crime, 320 CEU eTD Collection 1969 1968 1967 1992 United Nations General Assembly (UN General Assembly) United Nations 2007 2006 2005 1963 1947 International Law Commission (ILC) 2004 1999b 1999a 1998 1992b 1992a 1991b 1991a Group Visegrád 2002 2001 Rapporteur), and intergovernmental organizations, by Mr. Abdullah El-Erian, Special DocumentA/CN.4/218 andAdd. 1(Forthreport on betweenrelations States 119-62. Special Special Rapporteur), andStates intergovernmental organizations, by Mr. Abdullah El-Erian, DocumentA/CN.4/203 andAdd. 1-5(Third report on relations between 133-53. Special Special Rapporteur), andStates intergovernmental organizations, by Mr. Abdullah El-Erian, DocumentA/CN.4/195 andAdd. 1 (Second report on relations between Resolution 47/33, 73 IVF Budget2007. IVF Annual report. IVF Budget2005. Rapporteur), and inter-governmental organizations, by Mr. Abdullah El-Erian, Special Document A/CN.4/161 and Add. 1(First report on relations between States 1955, and36/39,18 November 1981. resolutions12 485(V), December984 1950, (X) and 3December 985(X), Assembly in resolution 174 (II),21November 1947,and amended by Statute of the International Law Commission, adopted by the UN General Summit Declaration, Krom Bratislava, 14 May. Fund, Agreement International the Visegrádconcerning the of establishment summit, Bratislava, 14 May. Contents of by Visegrád Cooperation the Ministers’ approved Prime the Chronology of V4events,selected 1993-1998. Central European Free Trade Agreement, Krakow, 21 December. Prague. SummitDeclaration, Summit Declaration, Krakow, 31 October. Integration (English translation), Visegrád, 15February. Republicthe of Poland andthe Republicin of Hungary forStriving European Republic, Federal Slovak and Czech between the Cooperation on Declaration media freedom, Thessaloniki. on Charter Brussels. Facilitation, and Liberalisation Trade on Understanding of Memorandum regional initiatives, Sarajevo, 30 July. of participating and facilitating International Organizations andAgencies and Yearbook ofthe International Law Commission Yearbook ofthe International Law Commission rd Yearbookthe of International Law Commission Yearbookthe of International Law Commission plenary meeting, 25November. ƟĜ íž, 12 May. 321 , vol.2, 1-22. , vol.2, 159-185. , vol.2, , vol.2, , vol.2, CEU eTD Collection 2004 1971b 1975 Organizations (UN Conference on International Organizations) United Nations Conference on the Representation of States in their Relations with International 1971a Crampton, Richard, University 2006. Oxford,of Oxford. 17 May. Caplan, Robert, University of Oxford. 2005. Oxford, 9 November. Bryza, Matthew, assistant to the US State subsecretary. 2007. Bucharest,5 August. Antonov, Viorica, Marshall Fundin Moldova. 2006.Devin, 5August. Antohi,February-April, Sorin. 2004. Budapest. Ananiev, Jovan, Director for Crisis Management, Ministry of Defence of F.Y.R. Macedonia. 2. Interviews 1991 1989 1955 Warsaw Pact 1970 2006. Interview by author.Devin,the 3August. Workthe International Law of Commission Commission Assembly,ApriI-30 26 July 1971), the work of its twenty-third session, Report of the Commission to the General DocumentA/8410/REV.1 (Report of Internationalthe Law Commission on (part I),1-142. with InternationalOrganizations United NationsConference onthe Representation ofStatesintheir Relations Character. of a Universal Organizations International with Relations in their States of Representation the on Convention Vienna Special Rapporteur), andStates intergovernmental organizations, by Mr. Abdullah El-Erian, DocumentA/CN.4/241 andAdd. (Sixth 1-6 onrelations report between Office of Legal Affairs. Legal of Office University Press, 2005. and New Budapest, Malcolm Byrne, 682-3. York: Central European castle? Aninsidehistory ofthe Warsaw Pact, 1955-1991 25 February 1991. Trans. Malcolm Bryne. in Reproduced Agreement on the Cessation of the Military Provisions of the Warsaw Pact, CentralYork: University European 2005. Press, 1955-1991 in Reproduced Records of Foreign the Minister’s Meetingin Warsaw, 26-27. October CentralYork: University European 2005. Press, 1955-1991 in Reproduced Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance, Warsaw, 14 May. A/CONF .67/16. Rapporteur), and intergovernmental organizations, by Mr. Abdullah El-Erian, Special DocumentA/CN.4/227 andAdd. (Fifth 1-2 report on relations between States , ed. Vojtech Mastny and Malcolm Byrne, 655-63. Budapest, New , ed. Vojtech Mastny and Malcolm Byrne, 77-9. Budapest, New , vol.2 (part 1), 275-432., vol.2 (part Yearbook ofthe International Law Commission A cardboardcastle? Aninsidehistory oftheWarsaw Pact, A cardboardcastle? Aninsidehistory oftheWarsaw Pact, Yearbookthe of International Law Commission 322 , 4 February14 March - Yearbookthe InternationalLaw of , 6 th ed., vol.1, United Nations, Official Records of , ed. Vojtech Mastny , vol.2. Document A cardboard , vol.2, 1-24. , vol.2 CEU eTD Collection Ungureanu, Mihai-R Teplevac, Elisabeth, former staff member of the UN General Assembly Presidency. 2006. Stoian, Marian, International Business Advisory. 2006. Bucharest, 31 August. Schöpflin, George, London School of Economics. 2004. Budapest, 17 November. World October-November. Bucharest, R.T., Bank.2004. Roman, Petre, former Romanian Prime Minister. 2005. Bucharest, 7 August. Petre, Zoe, former senior advisor on foreign policy in the staff of the Romanian Presidency. Nyerkyi, Joszef. Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 2004. Budapest, 24 April. N.R., United Nations Development Program. 2004. Bucharest, September. Nedog, Janez, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Slovenia. 2006. Sofia, 22 September. 1ă Munteanu, Aurelian, Moldova State University. 2006. Sofia, 16 December. Mocnik, Mitja, SECI Regional Center for Combating Transborder Crime. 2007. Bucharest, Pro. 2006.Bucharest, 29 September. Markovic, SECI Katrin, M.L., Member of the advisory board, Black Sea Trade and Development Bank. 2006. Mele Lopandi Kis, János,Hungarian philosopher2005. anddissident. Budapest,5April. K.S., official in the Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 2008. Bucharest, May-June. WorldJ.G., Bank.2004.Bucharest,October-November. Jeszenszky, Géza, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Hungary. 2006. Budapest, 12 April. I.F., official in the Croatian Ministry of European Integration. 2007. Istanbul, 23 March. Gorka, Sebestyan, Institute for Transitional Democracy and International Security. 2004. Geremek, Bronislaw, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland. 2006. Oxford, 17 May. Geoan Gallagher, Tom, University of Bradford. 2005. Oxford, 13 October. Degeratu, Constantin, national security foradvisor the Romanian Presidency. 2007. Deac, Liliana, Director of the External Affairs Department, Chamber of Commerce and stase, Adrian,former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania. 2005. Bucharest, 29 July. ú canu, Teodor, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania. 2005. Bucharest, 3 July. ă , Mircea,former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania. 2006. Bucharest, 17 ü Montenegro. 2004.Correspondence with author,April-May.the , Dusko, former Head of EU Directorate, Foreign Ministry of Serbia and September. Sofia, 15 December. 15 Sofia, 2004. Budapest,17November. 17 January. 27September. Bucharest, 16 November.Budapest, 18January.Bucharest, Industry of Romania. 2005.Bucharest,14 July. Eastern Europe Europe Eastern Regional Budapest, 23November. 2003. Envoy. ă zvan,former SECI Deputy Coordinator and Stability Pact for South 323 CEU eTD Collection European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. 2007. Development. and Reconstruction for Bank European 1994. Development. and Reconstruction for Bank European 4. Statistics Slovenia 1996 Slovakia 1995,1999,2004 2005 Serbia and Montenegro, Serbia, 2006 Romania,1993, 1997, 1991, 2004 2006 Montenegro, Poland,2005 1997, Hungary,2004 1999, F.R. Yugoslavia, 2001 F.Y.R. Macedonia, 1998 Czech Republic, 1997,2003 Croatia 1995,2006 2001 Bosnia-Herzegovina Albania 1996,2004 3. National foreign policy programs Zidaru, Irina, Romanian Ministry of Bucharest, Affairs.2007.Foreign 16January. Velichkov, former Kamen, Bulgarian 2006.Devin,ambassador. August. 1 Vienna Institute Viennafor Institute Comparative 1996. Economic Studies. Viennafor Institute Comparative 1990. Economic Studies. Ágh, Attila. 1998. World Bank.1996. Adler, Emanuel. 1997. Seizing Constructivism the middleground: inworld politics. Acharya, Amitav. 2002. Regionalism and the emerging world order: Sovereignty, autonomy, B. Secondary materials Bank. Macmillan. London: The Bank. The London: Wiener Institut für Internationale Wirtschaftsvergleiche. für Internationale Wiener Institut European Journal ofInternational Relations 32. London: Routledge. W. ed. Shaun Hughes,NicolaBreslin, andBen Phillips, Rosamond, Cristopher 20- identity. In World Bank. The politics of Central Europe Bosnia andHerzegovina:Toward economicrecovery New New regionalisms intheglobalpoliticaleconomy: Theories and cases 324 . London:Sage. 3: 319-63. Countries intransition Comecon data1989 Transition report update Transition report . Washington, DC: . London: The London: . . London: . Vienna: . , CEU eTD Collection Ancel, Jacques.1936. Anderson, Edgar. 1988. The Baltic Entente 1914-1940: Its strength and 1914-1940:Itsstrength The weakness. Anderson,Baltic 1988. Entente Edgar. Anderson, Edgar. 1974. The Pacts of Mutual Assistance between the U.S.S.R and the Baltics Apor, Balázs.Apor, The 2004. expulsion of German speaking from population Hungary. In 1998. Andreopoulos, Geroge. Enforcing humanitarian action: Lessonsfrom UNPROFOR Berend, Iván. 1996. T. Baki Anastasakis, Othon and Boji Vesna Bergsten, FredC.1997.Open regionalism. Bérenger, Jean. 1990. Banac, Ivo. 1984.Banac, Ivo. Bán, András, ed.1997. Anastasakis, Othon. 2002. Towards regionalAnastasakis, in Othon. An cooperation 2002.Towards theof Balkans: assessment Allen, Robert C. 2001. The rise and decline of the Soviet economy. Berend, T. Iván, György Berend,Ránki. 1974. Iván, György T. Bechev, ConstructingEast Europe:The politics Dimitar. 2005. of regional South Balkan ü -Hayden, Milica. 1995. Nesting Orientalisms: The case of former The of Yugoslavia. case Nesting Orientalisms: 1995. Milica. -Hayden, Centrale). Paris: Delagrave. Paris: Centrale). Studies, Ohio University.State Columbus,Valgemae, 239-56. Association for Ohio:advancement the of Baltic States. In European integration Longo Editore. relations and UNOSOM. In Stockholm. Stockholm:andAleksander 79-99. Loit, for Centre Baltic Studies, University of Universitatis Stockholmiensis. StudiaBalticaStockholmiensia and Civilization. Departmentof Institute, History University Arfon Rees,Florence: European 33-45. Second World War the end of atthe EasternEurope for communities the “German” expulsion of Serbia. Publications. Europe Central apostbellum East for Review regional initiatives In EUapproach. the to theperiphery 19 London: Cornell University Press. cooperation, D.Phil. 1995-2003. University diss., of Oxford. Economics th and20 54, no. 4 54,no. (Winter): 917-31. , ed. Stefano Bianchini and Robert Craig Nation, 71-82. Ravenna: A. The national question inYugoslavia: origins, history, politics 34, no.4 34, (November):859-881. th Baltic History centuries Histoire de l'empiredes Habsbourg 1273-1918. Central and Eastern Europe, 1944-1993: Detour from theperiphery 1944-1993:Detourfrom Eastern Europe, Central and Pax Britannica:Wartime Foreigndocuments regarding Office plans Manuel géographique de politique européenne Manuel géographiquede . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. , ed. Duško Lopandi , ed.Duško , EUI Working Paper HEC 2004/1, ed.Steffen Prauserand Working PaperHEC , EUI The Yugoslav andits conflict implicationsinternationalfor Regional cooperationinSouth EasternEurope: Theeffects of . London: The Hellenic Observatory, LSE. . New York: Columbia University Press. þLü , ed.Arvids Ziedonis, William Wintre, and Mardi Economic development of East-CentralEconomic developmentof Europeinthe -Dželilovi The WorldEconomy 325 ü ü , 25-38. Belgrade: European inBelgrade:Movement European , 25-38. . 2002. . Boulder: Atlantic Research and Balkan regionalco-operation and 20, no.5: 545-67. Paris: Fayard. Canadian Journal of 3, ed. John Hiden 3,ed. , vol. 1(L’Europe , . Ithaca, Slavic Acta The CEU eTD Collection Buzan, Barry. 1991. Jaap de Buzan, Barry, OleWilde.1998. Wæver, Buzan, Barry. 1983. integration The VisegrádRegional and European cooperation Bunce, Valerie. 1997. Group: Brown, Michael, Sean M. Lynn-Jones, Steven and Miller,1996. E. ed. Pierre.1997. Broué, Breslin, Richardand Shaun, Higgott, BenRegionsRosamond. 2002. in comparative Breslin, 2000.Studying andRichard Higgott. Shaun, regions: Learningfrom old,the Brenner, Michael. 2001. The US, NATO, and East-West relations. In Br Bo Bozo, Frédéric. 2001. Defense versus security? Reflections oon the past and present of pastandpresentof the the oon Reflections security? Defenseversus Frédéric.2001. Bozo, Boutros-Ghali, 1949. Boutros. Bhagwati, Jagdsih. 1993. Regionalism and multilateralism: An overview. In overview. An multilateralism: and Regionalism 1993. Jagdsih. Bhagwati, Bogdan, Henry. 1991. nexus trade Thetrade-environmentregional potential andthe 2002. of Bøås, Morten. Bøås, Marianne Morten, H.Marchand,and Timothy M. Shaw. political 2005.The economy Berlin,concepts 1992.Two liberty. of Isaiah. In ă Ğ tianu, Gheorghe I.1969. tianu, Gheorghe ak, Edita. 1991. SlovaksAn and Czech: uneasy coexistence. In Peter Katzenstein,Peter Oxford: Berghan 240-284. Books. the post-coldwar era relations Boulder, London:LynneRienner Publishers. In in post-communist Europe. Rosamond, London: 1-19. Routledge. cases In perspective. Democratic Peace new. the constructing Romanian Academy Society, 1969. The first fifty years fifty first The years In tasks of Alliance“future the (1949-1999). 88 Oxford University Press. Rosamond, London: 48-65. Routledge. cases In institutions. Marchand, and Timothy M. Shaw,1-12.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. regions The politicaleconomy of and regionalisms of regions and regionalisms: Anintroduction ourto critical, revisionistinquiries. In Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. in regionalintegration , ed.Gordon Skilling, 65-81.New York: St. Martin’s Press. , ed. Shaun Breslin, Cristopher W. Hughes, Nicola Phillips, and Ben , ed. Gustav Schmidt, vol.2, 65-80. New York: Palgrave. , ed. Shaun Breslin, Cristopher W. Hughes, Nicola Phillips, and Ben . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. People, states and fear: An agendaforinternational security studiesin People, states and The fear: national security problem ininternational Histoire de l’Internationale Communiste Histoire des pays de l’Est: Des origins ànosjours New regionalisms intheglobal political economy: Theoriesand New New regionalisms intheglobalpoliticaleconomy:Theories and . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. , ed.GustavSchmidt, vol.97-116.New York: 2, Palgrave. La MerNoire: Desorigines à laconquête ottomane . New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Harvester York: . New Contribution àl New Political Economy , ed. Jaime De Melo, and Arvindand Panagariya,22-51. , ed.JaimeDeMelo, Mitteleuropa: Between Europe and Germany and Between Europe Mitteleuropa: 326 ’ étude desententesregionales Security: A new Security:new A framework foranalysis Four essays on liberty 5,no.3:333-52. A history of NATO: The A history offirst fifty , ed. Morten Bøås, H. Morten Marianne , ed. . Paris: Fayard. Czechoslovakia, 1918- Czechoslovakia, A history of NATO: . Paris: Perrin. , 118-72. Oxford: , 118-72. New dimensions . Paris: Pedone. . Paris: Debating the . Munich: . , ed. . CEU eTD Collection Claval, 1998. Paul. Claudin, 1975. Fernando. ECandExpectations the for Andrej. inEastCentral Cima,Europe: Newdemocracies 1992. in Checkel, constructivist Theory. Jeffrey.The turn Relations International 1998. Coackley, John, ed. 1993. Coackley,John, ed. Codenhove-Kalergi, Richard N. 1988. Codenhove-Kalergi, N. Richard Checa Hidalgo, Diego, and Luciana Alexandra Ghica. 2007. Gestionarea crizelor Gestionarea crizelor 2007. Ghica. Alexandra andLuciana Diego, Checa Hidalgo, Cohen, Lenard J.1993. Cassese, 2001. Antonio. 1939. Edward H. Carr, Caplan, Richard.2005. Crawford, Beverly . 1996.Explaining from defection international cooperation: Germany’s Crampton. 1996. Crampton, Richard J.,Ben ed. 1999a. Cottey,Andrew, Calleya,2000. ed. Stephen, Buzan, Barry. 2003. Regional Security Complex Theory in the Post-Cold War World. In Cousens, Elizabeth K. 2001. M., Charles Cater. andbeyond: inCottey,Andrew.Security cooperation Group TheVisegrád Central 1999b. by B. Pearce. New York, London: Monthly Review Press. for EastWest Studies Institute forAffairs (NewYork). the International Europe the CSCE. In Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Politics Zulean, Ia 205-46. policy: Concepts, institutions, processes], ed. LucianaAlexandra Ghica and Marian Cass. Politica de securitate na conflictelor interna conflictelor Trainard. Paris: Presses Universitaires deFrance. Paris:Trainard. PressesUniversitaires Cambridge University Press. unilateral of recognition unilateral Croatia. Press. Timothy M. Shaw, 140-59. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. New Theories of Regionalism: APalgrave Reader century 89. London: Macmillan Westand East Institute. prosperity andsolidarity the from Barents tothe Black Sea In Europe. international relations Dayton Accords prosperity andsolidarityfromtheBarents to the Black Sea , ed.Ian M. Cuthbertson, 179-206. Helsinki: TheFinnishof Institute . London: Routledge. 50:324-48. An introductiontoregionalgeography Subregional cooperation intheNew Europe: Buildingsecurity, The twenty years’ crisis, 1919-1939: An introductionto the studyof An The twenty 1919-1939: crisis, years’ Europe and ofnew therecognition states inYugoslavia Broken bonds: ThedisintegrationofYugoslavia International law Redefining theCSCE: ChallengesandopportunitiesRedefining intheNew . Boulder, London:LynnePublishers. Rienner The communist movement: From Comintern toCominform. ú Regionalism inthe post-Cold War world The territorialmanagementofethnicconflict Subregional cooperation in the New Buildingsecurity, cooperation intheNew SubregionalEurope: i: Polirom. Ġ ionale [International crisis and conflict management]. In management]. and conflict crisis ionale [International . London: Macmillan. Ġ ional ă Pan-Europe . Oxford: Oxford University Press. World Politics : concepte,institu 327 Towards inBosnia: Implementingthe peace Atlas of Eastern Europe in the twentieth Eastern Europeinthe Atlas of . Translated by Mathilde andPierre 48:482-521. , ed. Fredrik, ed. Söderbaum, . Translated byI.Thompson. . Translated Ġ ii procese , ed. Andrew Cottey, 69- . London: Macmillan. London: . . Aldershot: Ashgate. . Boulder: Westview [National security [National . London: Frank . Cambridge: Trans. World ú i a CEU eTD Collection Dilthey,Wilhelm. 1991. Djorjevic, Dimitrije. 1992. The Yugoslav phenomenon.Djorjevic,The Yugoslav In Dimitrije.1992. 1997. Deyon, Pierrre. Deutsch, Karl. 1969. Degan, Vladimir D.1997. Droz, Jacques.1960. Droz, Dobrincu, Dorin, andCristian 2007. Vasile. Deutsch, Karl,Derrida, Jacques. 1967. Sidney A. Burrell, Robert A. Kann, Maurice Lee Jr., Martin Lichterman, de Martone, Emmanuel. 1930. Keith.Crawford, 1996. Du Crowe, DavidCrowe, M. 1993. Dangerfield, Martin. 2006.Subregional integration and EUenlargement: Wherenextfor 1999. Initiative. The Central In Cviic,European Christopher. Cviic, 1991. Christopher. A casestudy behaviour: and market-conforming trade East-West Csikós-Nagy, Béla.1986. Dangerfield, Martin. 2000. Dahrendorf,Ralf. 1990. Ġ u, Alexandr.1999. locales deFrance. locales Neville. Princeton: Princeton University Press Princeton Princeton: Neville. and the Evolution of the European Consciousness] Bucharest: All the analysis of communist dicatorship in Romania]. Bucharest: Humanitas analiza dictaturii comuniste in Romania Press. University Century Europe intheTwentieth ofin thelight historicalexperience 1957. Wagenen. Van W. Richard and Loewenheim, L. Francis Lindgren, E. Raymond International. Law Kluwer MA: Cambridge, Publishers; Paris: Payot. Manchester, New York: Manchester University University Press. Manchester New York: Manchester, 1940. CEFTA? Institute of International Affairs. Csikós-Nagy and David London: Young, 353-61. Macmillan. of Hungary. In Europe: The politicaleconomyofEurope: The CEFTA Windus. Institute. Sea the Black the New Europe: BuildingSecurity,Prosperity andSolidaritytheBarents to from Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford: Westview Press. Political community andthe North Atlanticarea:Internationalorganization Journal ofCommonJournal MarketStudies L’Europe L’Europe Centrale: Evolutionhistorique de“Mitteleuropa.”de l’idée Nationalism anditsalternatives Ideea de Europa Régionalismes et régions dansl’Europe des quinze , ed.Andrew Cottey, London: 113-127. Macmillanand EastWest De la grammatologie The Baltic States and the Great Foreignrelations,1938- Powers: Baltic Statesandthe The East Central European politics today:From chaos tostability? Introduction to the human sciences Reflections on the revolutions inEurope ontherevolutions Reflections East-West tradeinthe changing globalenvironment Remaking theBalkans Sources ofinternationallaw Subregional economiccooperationCentral in andEastern L'Europe L'Europe Centrale ú i evolu , ed. Joseph Held, 306-44. New York: Columbia 306-44. NewYork: Joseph Held, , ed. . Princeton: Princeton University Press. 328 . Paris: Editions du Minuit. Ġ Raport Comisiapreziden final. ia con . Paris: Armad Colin. Armad . Paris: [Final report: Presidential commission for commission Presidential report: [Final . London: Pinter Publishers, The Royal . Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. . NewYork:AlfredKnopf. 44,no.2: 305-24. ú tiin . The Hague, Boston: M.Nijhoff Ġ ei europene. , vol. 1. Translated by Michael Columbia history of Eastern Columbia historyof Subregional Cooperation in . London: Chatto and Chatto London: . [The Idea of Europe . Paris: Editions Paris: . Ġ ial , ed. Béla, ed. ă pentru CEU eTD Collection Falk, Richard. 2003. Regionalism and world order: The changing global setting. Theglobal Falk, changing Regionalism order: world In Richard. and 2003. Falk, Barbara.2003. Fitzmaurice, John.1993.Regional inCentral co-operation Europe. Louise,Fawcett, andAndrew In Introduction. Hurrell. 1995. Foucault, Michel. 1976. 1998. Fitzmaurice, John. Fitzmaurice, John. 1992. Fischer-Gala In historical perspective. from a Regionalism Louise. 2005. Fawcett, Louise.Fawcett, 1995.Regionalism inhistorical In perspective. Foucault, Michel. 1971. Neil. Fodor, 1990. Fawcett, Louise. 2004. Exploring regional domains:A comparative history of regionalism. Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Ethier, Wilfred J.2001.Regional regionalism. In Foucault, Michel. 1969. European 1999. European Stability Initiative. Etzioni,Amitai. 2001. Fairclough, Norman. 1989. Evans,2006. Malcom, ed. University Press. University London: Longman. London: Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Basingstoke: New of Regionalism Joseph Held, 1-16.NewYork: Columbia University Press. In bottles.” regionalism: Theoryandpractice Gallimard. 16, no.3(July): 380-400. Langenhove 21-37.London,Ann (MI):PlutoArbor Press. Hurrell, Oxford: Oxford University 1-6. Press. Regional organisations and internationalorder Martin’s Press. Martin’s and Slovakia Republic Hungary, theCzech International Affairs Andrew Hurrell,Oxford: Oxford 9-36. University Press. politics: Regionalorganisations andinternationalorder Lahiri, London, 3-15. NewYork: Routledge. analysis communities initiatives Ġ i, Stephen. 1992. Eastern Europe in Europe “Old theEastern Twentieth i, 1992. wineinnew Century: Stephen. . London: Macmillan. London: . . Report Series, 1 September. Berlin: European Stability Intitiative. The dilemmasofdissidence inEast-Central Europe The Warsaw A politicaland The Warsaw Organization: organizationalTreaty . Oxford: Lexington . Oxford: Lexington Books. Columbia history ofEastern EuropeintheTwentieth Century L’ordre dudiscours L’archéologie dusavoir The Baltic:Aregional future Histoire de la sexualité International law Political unificationrevisited: Onbuildingsupranational Language and power Politics intheVisegrádand government countries:Poland, Critical discourse analysis discourse Critical 80, no.3:429-46. , ed. Fredrik, ed. Söderbaum, andTimothy M. Shaw, 63-80. The Stability Pact andlessons fromadecadeofregional , 2nd ed.Oxford: Oxford University Press. , ed. Mary Farrell, Björn Hettne, and Luk van andLuk Hettne, Farrell, Björn Mary , ed. . Paris: Gallimard. Paris: . 329 . Paris: Gallimard. . London: Longman. London: . Regionalism andglobalization , vol. 1 (La volonté de savoir). Paris: . London: Macmillan, New York: St. . London: St.Martin’s Press. : , ed.Louise and Andrew Fawcett The criticalstudyoflanguage Regionalism in world politics: , ed. Louise Fawcett and Fawcett Louise , ed. West European Politics Regionalism in world . Budapest: Central . Budapest: Global politicsof , ed. Sajal Theories , ed. . CEU eTD Collection Gustavsson, Jakob. 1999. How should we study foreign should Gustavsson, Jakob.policy we study change? 1999.How to Foreword 1916. Grumbach, S. operation inAgenda”“Peace UNPeacekeeping The Croatia: Grubisa, Damir.1998.The Granatstein,The JackL.2001. United Nations North and the Atlantic Treaty. In Guilhot, Nicholas.Guilhot, 2005. Garton Ash,Garton Timothy. 1991. Geiss,1997. Immanuel. Ghica, Luciana Alexandra. 2007. Securitatea regional Securitatea 2007. Alexandra.Ghica, Luciana Gheciu, Alexandra.2005. Garton Ash,Garton Timothy.Mitteleuropa? 1990. Gaonkar, Dilip Parameshwar, ed. 2001. ed. Dilip Parameshwar, Gaonkar, Gamble,Andrew, andAnthony Payne. 1996.Conclusion: The New Regionalism. In Gardner, Hall.NATO 2001. UN:The the and contemporary relevance of 1949Norththe Galbreath, David J.2007. Foucault, Michel. 1980. Fukuyama, Francis. 1992. In America. Latin in diplomacy collective and regionalism new The 2000. Alicia. Frohman, In des fractures. le et jeudesunifications or d’Europe, Fragments Foucher, Michel. 1991. New York: Columbia University Press. Ravenna: A.Editore. Longo international relations In success. and failure between Conflict l’Argus Suisse de la Presse Genève. Paris: Payot. years fifty The first NATO: Zulean, Ia 99-116. institutions,Concepts, ed.Luciana processes], Ghica Marian Alexandra and securitate na Bridgham. London, New York: Routledge. Budapest, Berlin andBudapest, Berlin Prague vol.1,39-56. NewYork: Palgrave. socialization the Cold after War London: Routledge. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Basingstoke: Regionalism andworld order Atlantic Treaty. In Treaty. Atlantic Press. University UNU/WIDER. András Palgraveand Osvaldo& Sunkel, Inotai Basingstoke: Macmillan 75-92. New andtheFutureofSecurityDevelopment, Regionalism Fronts etfrontières: untourdumondegéopolitique. New York: Pantheon Books. 1977 . Translated by Colin Gordon, Leo Marshall, John Mepham, and Kate Soper. LeoMarshall,. TranslatedJohn Mepham, byColinand Kate Gordon, 34, no. 1: 73-95. Ġ ional The question of German unification 1806-1996.unification The questionGerman of Power/knowledge: Selectedinterviews writings, andother 1972- The democracy makers:Humanrightsandinternational order The end history ofand the lastman ú NATO inthe“New Europe”: Thepoliticsofinternational i: Polirom. The Organization for Security andCo-operationinEurope We witnessedthe People:Therevolutions of1989, in Warsaw, A history of NATO: The first fifty years ă : concepte, institu , ed. Stefano BianchiniCraigStefano , ed.Robert and Nation, 83-108. L’Europe CentraleL’Europe , ed. Gustav Schmidt, vol.1, 29-38. New York: Palgrave. . London: Granta. London: . , ed.AndrewGamble and Anthony Payne, 247-64. . Stanford: Stanford University Press. Daedalus The Yugoslav conflict and Yugoslavconflict its implications The for 330 Alternative modernities Ġ ii procese 119,no.1: 1-22. , by Friedrich Naumann. Translated by , byFriedrich Naumann. Translated ă [Regional security]. In security]. [Regional Paris: Fayard. . New York: Free Press. [National security policy: security [National . Durham, NC:Duke , ed. Gustav Schmidt, , ed. Translated byFred Translated ed, Björn Hettne, ed, Cooperation and A historyof Politica de . . CEU eTD Collection Hall, C.2000. Richard Hettne, Björn, and Fredrik Söderbaum. 2002. Theorising the rise of regionness. In Theorising of rise the regionness. and Björn, 2002. Söderbaum. Hettne, Fredrik Challengesintegration 1995. Havlik, In Peter. to with West. the Harvie, Christopher. 1994. 2004.Hawksanddoves: Woodhouse. Wibke,Ramsbotham, Tom Hansen, and Oliver Central Hanák, 1989.A Péter. historical Europe: inregion modern In times. Haas,B., ErnstandAllen S. Whiting. 1956. Hettne, Björn. 1999a.Globalization and New Regionalism: the The second great Hettne, András Björn, Inotai, andOsvaldoSunkel. introduction.1999. Editors’ In and therise Björn, Hettne, of Fredrik Theorising Söderbaum.regionness. 2000. Held,Joseph. 1994. Derek.1992. Heater, Hanák, 1992.Hungary Péter. Anon course: a fixed of outline history,Hungarian 1918-1945. Hall, Peter, and Rosemary C.R. Taylor. 1996. Political Science and the three new Haas, Ernst B.1970. The study of regional integration: Reflections on the joy and anguish of Propaganda. or Prescription,Haas,B. 1953.The Concept, Balance of Power: Ernst Guzzini, Stefano. 2000. A 2000. Guzzini,reconstruction Stefano. constructivismof inInternational relations. handbook.net). (www.berghof- Management Conflict for Constructive Center Research Berghof transformation resolution. In conflict and Peacekeeping New York:164-204. Columbia University Press. London, NewYork:Routledge. Inotaim Inotaim and OsvaldoSunkel, 1-24. transformation. In London: Routledge. Breslin, W. Cristopher Hughes,Nicola Phillips, and BenRosamond, 33-47. regionalisms intheglobalpolitical economy: Theories andcases Publishing. Arnold Suppan, Boulder: 223-6. WestviewPress. inEastCentraltransformation Europe In &Nobles. Barnes Central Europe institutionalisms. Co. Book McGraw-Hill xxxi-xxxvi. and theNew Regionalism Political Economy pretheorizing. Politics European Journal ofInternational Relations Columbia history of Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century Columbia historyofEastern EuropeintheTwentieth 5, no.4: 442-77. 5,no.4: The ideaof unity European Basingstoke: Macmillan. Basingstoke: Dictionary of East Europeanhistorysince1945 Dictionary of International Organization , ed. David Bloomfield, Martina Fischer and Beatrix Schmelzle. The Balkan Wars, 1912-1913: Prelude to the First World War Wars, Prelude World FirstThe Balkan 1912-1913: to the , ed. George Schöpflin and Nancy Wood, 57-69. Totowa,NJ: 57-69. SchöpflinNancy Wood, and George , ed. Political Studies The rise of regionalEurope Globalism and the New Globalism andthe New Regionalism 5, no.3: 457-73. , ed. Björn Hettne, András Inotai, and Osvaldo Sunkel, 44,no.5: 936-57. 331 Dynamics ofinternational relations Basingstoke: Macmillan. Basingstoke: . Leicester: Leicester University Press. University Leicester . Leicester: , ed. Hanspeter Neuhold,Hanspeter Havlik, ed. Peter and 24, no.4: 607-46. 6, no.2: 147-82. . London: Routledge. Berghof handbook for conflicthandbook for Berghof , ed. Björn Hettne, András Political and economic . London: Mansell , ed. Joseph Held, In Searchof , ed. Shaun . New York: Globalism World New New . CEU eTD Collection Himly,Auguste. 1876. Hettne, Björn. 2005.Beyond “New the Regionalism.” In Hettne, Björn. 2003.The NewRegionalism revisited. Hettne, Björn. 1999b. In TheNewRegionalism:A Prologue. Huntington, Samuel.Huntington, 1991b. Samuel.Huntington, Democracy’s 1991a. third wave. Samuel.Huntington, 1984.Willmore countriesbecome democratic? Howarth, David, andYannis Introducing 2000. Stavrakakis. discourse theory and political Holsti,Kalevi J., 1996. Holbrooke, Richard. 1998. Four rearticulation: reinscription, Restructuring,1991. reconstruction, Hoffman, Mark. In Aperspective. comparative Regionalism,security 2001. and development: Björn. Hettne, Hurrell,Andrew. 1995b.Regionalism in theoretical In perspective. Hurrell,Andrew. of 1995a.Explaining the inworld resurgence regionalism politics. Hopf,1998. Thepromise Relations Ted. constructivism of inInternational Theory. Glenn,Hook, andIanKearns, ed.1999. Holsti, Kalevi 1982. J., ed. Hurrell, Andrew. 1998. Security Hurrell,Security in Andrew.1998. America. Latin 543-71. Macmillan. PalgraveBasingstoke: M.Shaw,22-42. FredrikSöderbaum and Timothy Manchester: Manchester University Press. University Manchester Manchester: social change analysis. In 20, no.1. theory. international incritical voices Hachette. vol. Paris: András Inotai, OsvaldoSunkel, and 1-53. Comparingregionalisms: global development Implicationsfor Macmillan. Basingstoke: Regionalism Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Quarterly International Security Macmillan. Press. University Andrew Hurrell, Oxford: Oxford University 37-73. Press. politics: Regionalorganisations andinternationalorder of InternationalStudies world . London: Allen and Unwin. and Allen London: . 99,no.2. , ed. Björn Hettne, András Inotai András xv-xxx.and, ed.Björn Sunkel,OsvaldoHettne, Inotai Discourse theoryandpoliticalanalysis:Idetities,Discourse hegemonies and , ed. Howarth, David, Aletta , ed.Howarth,David,Aletta J. Norval, and Yannis 1-23. Stavrakakis, Historie dela territorialeformation des Etatsdel'EuropeCentrale The state, war,warThe state, andthestate of To end awar Why nations realign: Foreign policy restructuring inthepostwar The third wave:Democratization inthe late twentieth century 23,no.1: 171-200. 21,no.4: 331-58. . New York: Random House. 332 Subregionalism andworld order Millenium: Journal of International StudiesMillenium: Journal of International International Affairs New York: Palgrave, 2001. Journal of Democracy Journal of New New Political Economy Theories of New Theories Regionalism of . Cambridge: Cambridge . Cambridge: , ed. Louise Fawcett and Fawcett Louise , ed. Globalism and theNew Regionalism in world 74,no. 3:529-46. , ed. Björn Hettne, Björn , ed. Political Science 2,no.2: 12-34. 10, no. 4: 10,no. . London: . Review , ed. 2 . CEU eTD Collection Hveem, Helge. 1999. The regionalin The Hveem, 1999. Helge. project global In governance. Inalçik, Halil.Balkan. 1960. Inalçik, Halil, ed.1994. Donald and Quataert, The dimension. external Europe: inEastern Democratization Adrian G.V.1994. Hyde-Price, Jelavich, Barbara. 1983a. Jelavich, Barbara. Judt, Tony. 1991. The rediscovery of In Tony. Judt, Central The rediscovery Europe. of 1991. Jovi Jones, Keating.and Barry,Michael 1995. Jepperson, Ronald L.,AlexanderWendt, and PeterJ.Katzenstein.identity, 1996.Norms, Jelavich, 1983b. Barbara. Kabele, Jiri. 1995. The politics of Kabele,Jiri. of democratization: In politics 1995.The Czechoslovakia. Kaldor, Mary.Kaldor, 1999. Kann,A. 1974. Robert Kann, 1983b. Robert. 1983a. Kann, Robert. Karl, Terry, and Phillippe Schmitter. 1991. Modes of transition in Latin America, inSouthern Latin 1991. Modes of Schmitter. transition Karl, Phillippe and Terry, In An overview. enlargement: NATO Lawrence. Kaplan, ü , Dejan. 2003. Yugoslavism and Yugoslav communism. Yugoslav In , Dejan. and 2003.Yugoslavism ed. Geoffrey Vanhanen,Pridham and Tatu London: Routledge. 220-54. In Macmillan. Basingstoke: Regionalism Ottoman Empire,1300-1914 E.J.Brill. Wisconsin Press. Wisconsin Clarendon Press. Clarendon University Press. University identity inworld politics In innational security. and culture Cambridge University Press. University Press. centuries). Cambridge Cambridge: Press. Europe…Europe failed idea, 1918-1992 failed Havlik andArnold Suppan,Boulder: 69-84. Westview Press. economic inEastCentraltransformation Europe Polity Press. Polity Habsburg1848-1918 Monarchy, Octagon Octagon Books. Angeles, London: University of California Press. and Eastern Europe. and Eastern Books. Habsburg 1848-1918 Monarchy, years Democratization inEastern Europe: Domestic andinternational perspectives , ed. Gustav Schmidt,, ed. vol.1,193-206. NewYork: Palgrave. , ed. Björn, ed. András Hettne, and Sunkel, Inotai, Osvaldo 85-115. New wars:and old Organised violenceina global era The multinational empire: Nationalismand nationalreforminthe The multinational empire: Nationalism and national reform in the , ed. Stephen Boulder,, ed.Stephen Graubard, 23-58. SanFrancisco: Westview A historyofthe Habsburg Empire1526-1918. History oftheBalkans History of the Balkans History of The Encyclopediaof Islam International Social Science Journal , ed. Dejan Djoki , ed. Peter J.Katzenstein, Columbia Peter NewYork: , ed. 33-75. . Cambridge: University Cambridge Press. , vol. 1 (Empire and nationalities). New York: , vol. 2 (Empire reform). New York: Octagon The EuropeanUnionandtheregions 333 The culture of nationalThe cultureofsecurity: Norms and , vol. 2 (Twentieth century). Cambridge: century). (Twentieth 2 vol. , An economicand social history ofthe ü , 157-81. Madison:, 157-81. The University of , vol. 1 (Eighteenth and Nineteenth and (Eighteenth 1 vol. , , new vol.1,ed., 998-1000. Leiden: A history of NATO: The first fifty A historyofNATO:The , ed. Hanspeter Neuhold, Peter , ed. Yugoslavism: Histories of a Yugoslavism: Historiesof Eastern Europe…Central no. 128. Globalism andthe New Berkeley, Los Political and . Cambridge: . Oxford: , CEU eTD Collection Kaser, Michael. 1967. Katzenstein, Peter J., Robert O. Keohane, and Stephen Krasner. 1998. Keating, Michael, and Francisco Aldecoa, ed. 1999.Keating, Aldecoa, andFrancisco Michael, Keating, 1998. Michael. Keohane, Robert and Nye.1971. Joseph Keohane, Robert Khol, Radek. 2001. Czech Republic: A Pan-European perspective.In APan-European Czech Republic: 2001. Khol, Radek. andJoseph Keohane, Robert 1977. Nye. Kim, Samuel RegionalizationKim, Asia.Samuel andregionalismS. 2004. inEast Kobrinskaya, Irina. 2001.Russia: facts.In Facing the Kissinger, Henry. 1994. Kratochwil, Friedrich. 1996. Is the ship of culture at sea or returning? sea orreturning? In at culture shipof Is the 1996. Friedrich. Kratochwil, Kupich,Andrzej. Problems, 1999.CEFTA: experiences,In prospects. 1989.The HungarianJornai,hopes Visions,and reform process: János. In reality. Kofos, E. 1990. Greeceand and80s. E. Balkaninthe 70s the Kofos, Laclau, Ernesto, and Chantal andChantal Laclau, 1985. Mouffe. Ernesto, Krause, Keith, Michael Williams. 1997. Lapid, Yosef, and Friedrich Kratochwil. 1996. Revisiting the ‘national’: Toward anidentity Toward Kratochwil. the‘national’: 1996. Revisiting Friedrich Lapid, Yosef, and Krieger, Wolfgang. 1994.TowardsaGaullist Germany? lessonsfrom Some Yugoslavthe Oxford University Press, Royal Institute of International Affairs. International of Institute Royal Press, University Oxford 645-85. Organization relations subnational of governments and politicalchange Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers. national debates transition 193-222. Athens:193-222. ELIAMEP. Studies Boulder: Rienner. Lynne theory IR culture andidentityin Lynne RiennerPublishers. debates Lapid and Kratochwil.Friedrich Lynne Rienner. Boulder: EastWest Institute. BlackSea tothe the Barents prosperitysolidaritycooperationEurope: Buildingsecurity, and from intheNew Stanford: University and Stark. Stanford Press. David the economicsocialism institutions of :Chinaand Eastern Europe agenda in agenda neorealism? In Verso. crisis. Minneapolis: University Press. Minnesota of World PolicyJournal 4:39-67. , ed.Gale and A.Mattox Arthur R.Rachwald, Boulder, 169-85. London: . Boston: Little Brown. and the study study politics. world of and the Comecon: Integrationproblems oftheplannedeconomies Diplomacy The new The new regionalism inWestern Europe:Territorial restructuring , ed.Gale A.andArthur Mattox R.Rachwald, Boulder, 147-65. . Cheltenham, UK: E.Elgar. The return ofcultureand identityin IR theory . New York: Simon & Schuster. 11,no.1:26-38. , ed. Andrew Cottey, 90-112. London:Andrew Macmillan , ed. Cottey, and Power andinterdependence: World politicsin Critical security studies: concepts and cases 334 , ed. Yosef Kratochwil., ed.Yosef Lapid andFriedrich Transnational relations andworld politics . London: Frank Cass. Hegemony and socialiststrategy Paradiplomacyaction: Theforeign in International Organization Enlarging NATO:Thenational Southeastern EuropeYearbook Enlarging NATO:The Journal of East Asian Journal of , ed. Victor Nee The return of International Subregional , ed. Yosef 52, no. 4: 52, . London: . Remaking . London: . . . , CEU eTD Collection March, James G., and Johan P. Olsen. 1998. The institutional dynamics of international March, James G., and Johan P. Olsen. 1989. March, James G., and Johan P. Olsen. 1984. The New Institutionalism: Organizational Männik, Erik. 2008. The role of the ESDP in Estonia’s foreign policy. In D.,andMansfield, Edward Helen V. Milner. 1997. Marbeau, Michel. 2001. Mansfield, Edward Mannheim,Karl. 1930. D., and HelenJ.1954. Mangone, Gerard V. Milner. 1999. The new wave of regionalism. Magris, Claudio. 1997. Mitteleuropa ‘hinterna Mitteleuropa Claudio.Magris, 1997. Lopandi Lopandi Le Galès, Patrick, and Christian Lequesne, ed. 1998. Lopandi Linz, JuanJ.,and AlfredStepan. 1996. Jacques.Le Rider, 1994. 1991. Lavigne, Marie. integration. In oncomparative regional Theoretical Laursen, Finn.2003. perspectives Lewis, Paul G. 1997. Theories of democratization and patterns of regime change in Eastern change regime of and patterns democratization of Theories G.1997. Lewis, Paul ü ü ü Press. political political orders. San Diego: Harcourt Brace. Harcourt San Diego: factors in life. factors political 139-54. London:139-54. Routledge. in Northern Europe: TheNordic andBaltic statesandthe ESDP International Organization New York: Columbia University Press. Co. Book McGraw-Hill utopias], ed. A. Babe Europa central In Niculescu. Adrian by translated German?], completely or ‘hinternational’ Serbia. regional initiatives framework. In 2002b.Regional, Duško. in cooperation Towards anewSEE: institutional regional initiatives 2002a. ed. , Duško, Movement in Serbia. Movement Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. , Duško. 2001. , Duško. Press. University Hopkins Johns Baltimore: consolidation: Southern Europe,South America and post-communist Europe 30. Aldershot: Ashgate.30. Aldershot: perspectives Theoretical Comparative regionalintegration: Europe. Journal ofCommunist Studiesand Transition Politics International political economy andsocialism La Société des nations ă Ideology and utopia: Introdcution to the scoiology of knowledgeIdeology andutopia:Introdcutiontothescoiologyof La Mitteleuropa. Regional initiatives inSouth Eastern Europe International Organization Regional cooperationinSouth ofEastern Europe: Theeffects : Nevroze, dileme,utopii : Nevroze, . Belgrade: European in . Belgrade:Movement European Serbia. , ed. Duško Lopandi , ed.Duško A shorthistory ofinternationalorganization Regional cooperation inSouthEasternEurope: Theeffects of Ġ i and C. Ungureanu, 81-85. Ia American Political Science Review American Political 53,no.3: 589-627. Paris: Presse Universitaire de France. 335 Rediscovering Institutions . Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Ġ Problems ofdemocratictransition and ü ional , 46-59. Belgrade: European inBelgrade:Movement European , 46-59. [Central Europe: Neuroses, dilemmas, Neuroses, Europe: [Central 52, no.4: 943-69. Regions inEurope The political economy ofregionalism ă ’ sau total ’ saugerman total ú i: Polirom. 78, no.3: 734-49. 78,no.3: , ed. Finn Laursen, 3- , ed. . New York: Free . Belgrade: European . Trans. D.Lambert. 13, no. 1: 4-26. . London: Routledge. New security issues security New , ed.Clive Archer, ă ? [Mitteleuropa: . NewYork: . . . CEU eTD Collection Marks, Gary, and Larry Diamond, ed. 1992. Marmullaku, 1975. Ramadan. Minotaite, Grazina. 2003. The Baltic States: In search of security and identity. In Mattox, Gale A.Rachwald, Arthur2001. R. and ed. StabilityA.UnitedMattox, Gale In 2001. States: engagement enlargement. through and as history. In Warsaw The Pact 2005. Mastny,Vojtech. Markovi The political Bøås, andMorten economy M. Shaw.1999. Marchand, Marianne Timothy H., Mistry, Percy. 2000. Regional cooperation and economic development. In Minotaite, evolving Grazina.security Lithuania’s and ‘notonly defense policy: 2008. Mini Milner, Helen andKeikoKubota. V., 2005. Why movethe free to trade? Democracy and Meyer, Henry Cord. 1955. Walter.Mattli, 1999. AttitudesMason, market towards the and S.1995. David participation in political the Marmullaku, Ramadan.2003.Albanians in Yugoslavia. In Mitrany, [1933]. David. ü , Jelica. 2002. Conference summary Conference In summary and recommendations. 2002. , Jelica. ü December 1995 17. Belgrade: European inBelgrade: Movement 17. Serbia. European Cambridge University Press. Rachwald, Boulder, 15-33. London:Lynne RiennerPublishers. Enlarging NATO:Thenational debates of new regionalism. South Eastern Europe: The effects of regional initiativesof effects South Eastern Europe:The Milosavljevi Routledge. Nordic andBalticstatestheESDP In contributor’. also but consumer Krupnick Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. NATO: Partners and playersinCentral East Europeansecurityand 43. policy intrade countries. developing the Boulder, London:LynneRienner Publishers. Budapest, NewYork:Central University1-74. European Press. the Warsaw history of Pact, 1955-1991 postcommunist states. Press. Osvaldo Sunkel, Basingstoke: 26-49. Palgrave Macmillan. development security ofand and thefuture New York: New York: St.Martin’s Press, 1975. University Partially in Press. reprinted idea, 1918-1992 , Brana. 1996. , Brana. ü The logic of regional integration: EuropeandbeyondThe logicof . London:and C.Hurst Company. Yugoslav crisisandtheworld:Chronologyevents,Yugoslav of January1990- . Belgrade: Institute of International Politics and Economics. , ed.Dejan Djoki The progress international government of Mitteleuropa inGermanThoughtand Action 1815-1945. Third World QuarterlyThird World Slavic Review Slavic Albania andthe Albanians ü , 304-16. Madison: The , 304-16. University Wisconsin of Reexamining democracy 336 New security issues in NorthernEurope: The 54, no.2: 385-406. 54,no.2: , ed. Vojtech Mastny and Malcolm Byrne, Malcolm Vojtech Mastny and , ed. The functional theorypolitics The functional of International Organization , ed. Gale A. Mattox , ed. andGaleA. Arthur R. Mattox 20,no.5:897-910. Enlarging NATO:Thenational debates , ed.CliveArcher, London: 155-73. , ed. Björn Hettne, András Inotai, and Inotai, András Hettne, Björn ed. , Yugoslavism:a Historiesfailed of . Trans. by andMargot Boško A cardboard castle?Aninside A cardboard , ed. Duško Lopandi , ed. Regional cooperation in . London: Sage. . New Heaven: Yale New Regionalism 59, no.1: 107- 59,no.1: . Cambridge: , 85-104. Hague. , ed. C. Almost ü , 9- . CEU eTD Collection Moravcsik, Andrew.1998. functional worldMitrany,approach The organization. to 1948. David. Nye, S.1971. Joseph Morgenthau, Hans J.1960. of inthecontext “NewRegionalism” the H.1999.Rethinking Mittelman, James Mitrany, andeconomics inmodernwar. of 1937.Interrelations David. politics Onuf, Nicholas G. 2001. The politics of constructivism.In of The politics Onuf,Nicholas G.2001. 1986. O’Donnell,Philippe Schmitter. Guillermo, and Nye, 1968. Introduction. Joseph S. In A questionsFour Marta. 2000. regional Muço, ontheStability approach. In Pact: Mitrany, David.1943. Olsen, J.P. 2001. Garbage cans, new institutionalism, and the study of politics. Kevin.O’Connor, 2003. Neumann, B.,and Wæver, Iver Ole ed.1997. Naumann, 1915. Friedrich. In Lessons andprospects. in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Craig. Peacekeeping 1998. Nation, Robert O’Donnell, Guillermo, Philippe Schmitter, Laurence Whitehead, ed.1986. Laurence Schmitter, Guillermo, Philippe O’Donnell, Offe, Claus. by 1991.Capitalism democratic design? facingDemocratic theory triple O’Donnell,James S. 1999. Inotai, andOsvaldoSunkel, Basingstoke: Macmillan, 25-53. 1999. Nye. Boston: Little, Brown and Co. globalization. In 24, no.3(July): 350-63. ed. New York: Alfred Knopf. Messina toMaastricht of internationalorganization andSocialScience American AcademyofPolitical Boston: Little, Brown and Co. York: M.E.Sharpe. generation relations: Thenext Bianchini Craigand Robert Ravenna: Nation, 41-60. A. LongoEditore. The Yugoslav anditsimplications conflict internationalfor relations Studies. International for around thecorner Pact: Just Political ScienceReview Press. University conclusionsaboutuncertaindemocracies Tentative in themaking? transition in East Central Europe.” Monographs. European East Press. University authoritarian rule:Comparative perspectives A working for development the Anargument peacesystem: functional Peace inparts: andconflict in regionalorganization. Integration London: Routledge. The history ofthe Baltic States Globalism and the New Globalism and the Regionalism Mitteleuropa. The choiceforEurope:Socialpurpose and statepower from Politics poweramong nations:Thestruggle for andpeace A coming of age: Albania under EnverHoxhaA comingof . Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 95, no.1: 191-8. 95, no.1: . Oxford: Oxford University Press. , ed. AlbertRakipi, Tirana:ed. 101-11. AlbanianInstitute , , ed. Karin, ed. M.Fierkeand New KnudErik Jørgensen. International Regionalism:Readings Berlin: Georg Reimer. Georg Berlin: Social Research 337 The future of international of relations: The future Masters . Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press. . Baltimore, London:Johns Hopkins Transitions from authoritarianrule: Transitions from 192(July): 82-8. 58, no.4. . Baltimore: Hopkins Johns , ed. Björn Hettne, András Hettne, Björn , ed. Constructing international International Affairs Transitions from Transitions . Boulder, Col.: , ed. Joseph S. American Annals of the Annals of , ed. Stefano ed. , Stability . 3d CEU eTD Collection Pesram, Sovereignty, Nalini. 1999.Coda: strategy. subjectivity, In Payne,Anthony, and AndrewGamble. 1996.Introduction: political The economy of Polunov, 2005. Alexander. 1995. Pipes, Richard. Piotrowski, Marcin Andrzej, and Arthur R. Rachwald. 2001. Poland: Returning toEurope. In In and Yugoslavia. Montenegro K. Serbia, 2003. Pavlowich, Stevan Will Black The become hopes SeaEconomic 1999. Cooperation: Pavliuk, Oleksandr. Pavkovi Peters, B. Guy.Peters, 1999. B. Guy.Peters, 1996.Political institutions: Old new. and In Papandreou, GeorgeA.2000.A total Balkan approach.In Anoverview. Arvind.debate: regionalism Panagariya, The Prauser, Steffen,2004. Prauser, Arfon and Rees, ed. PitmanPotter, B.in 1943.Universalism versusregionalism international organization. Ozali Price, Richard, and Christian Reus-Smit. 1998. Dangerous liaisons? Critical liaisons? Dangerous Critical international Price, Richard,and 1998. Reus-Smit. Christian Owen, 1995. David. Ƽ a, Žaneta. 2008. European Security and Defense Policy: The Latvian Perspective. In Latvian Perspective. The European andPolicy: Defense Security 2008. a, Žaneta. ü , Aleksandar. 1997. , Wisconsin Press. Wisconsin andAnthony Macmillan.Payne, 1-20.Basingstoke: regionalism and world Order. In London: Pinter. London: multinational state Knopf. Rachwald, Boulder, 111-28. London:Lynne RiennerPublishers. Enlarging NATO:Thenational debates London:128-50. Macmillan and EastWest Institute. Sea theBarentsprosperity totheBlack andsolidarity from In reality? Oxford University Press. Science London: Lynne Rienner Publishers. subjectivity idea,1918-1992 a failed of corner 477-513. ESDP New security issues Northern in Europe: TheNordic and Balticstates the New York: M.E.Sharpe. New York: 259-94. theory and constructivism. Civilization. History Departmentof and 2004/1. Florence: European University Institute, the SecondWorldEastern Europeattheend of War. Science Review American Political , ed.Clive Archer, London: 115-38. Routledge. , ed.AlbertRakipi, Tirana:Albanian for 25-9. InternationalInstitute Studies. , ed. Richard, ed. Goodin E. and Hans-DieterKlingemann, Oxford: 205-20. , ed. Jenny Edkins, Nalini Pesram, and 163-75. Pin-Fat, Veronique Nalini , ed.Jenny Pesram,Edkins, Balkan odysseyBalkan Institutional theory inPolitical Science: The“new” institutionalism Subregional cooperation in the New cooperationSubregional in theNew Buildingsecurity,Europe: A concise Russia Revolution history ofthe . London: Macmillan. . London: Russia inthe Nineteenth century The fragmentation of Yugoslavia:The fragmentation of Nationalism ina . New York: Harcourt Brace & Co. , ed. Dejan Djoki European JournalofInternational relations Regionalism and world order The expulsion ofthe“German” communities for 37,no.5(October): 850-62. 338 , ed. Gale A. Mattox and Arthur R. ü , 57-70. Madison: The University of A new handbook ofPolitical StabilityPact: Justaround the . Trans. By Marshall S. Shatz. The WorldEconomy EUI Working Paper HEC . Yugoslavism: Histories New York: AlfredNew York: A. , ed. Andrew Cottey, Andrew , ed. , ed. Andrew Gamble Sovereignty and Sovereignty 22, no.4: 4,no.3: The . CEU eTD Collection Pronk, Jan Globalisation andregionalization.P. 1998. In Pridham, 1994. Thedemocratization: of international Theory,dimension practice Geoffrey. Rumpler, Helmut. 1997. Rumpler, Helmut. al.Andrzej,et 2000. Przeworski, Rotschild, Joseph. 1992. Rorty, Richard. 1982.Method,social and science, social hope. In Andrzej.Przeworski, 1991. Schiavone, Giuseppe.2001. Experience Anton.Rupnik, 2002. of Central European In Initiative. Rosamond, Ben. 2000. Hugh 1975. Rodgers, I. Volker,Rittberger, andBernhard Zangl. 2006. 2004.ThePykel, expulsion Piotr. of from In Germans Czechoslovakia. Said, 1978. Edward. AlfredReisch, A.1993.TheCentral Initiative: benotbe?European or to To Rebas, Hain. 1988. Baltic regionalism? Schimmelfennig, Frank. 2001. The Community Schimmelfennig,Frank. 2001.Thetrap: Liberal norms,rhetorical Community action, and Farian,Sabahi, Warner,ed. 2004. Daniel Bruce.Russett, 1993. Herring ,and George Sanford, 7-31. New York: St. Martin’s Press. dimension ofdemocratisationinEastern Europe In comparisons. andinter-regional University of Washington Press. Hague: Fondad. multilateral cooperation intheglobaleconomy Hamden, ArchonBooks. Conn.: pragmatism (Essays: 1972-1980) Press. well-being intheworld, 1950-1990 Staatsverfall inderHabsburgermonarchie and Policies and Civilization. DepartmentHistory of Institute, University European Florence: EUI WorkingArfon Prauserand HEC2004/1,ed.Steffen Rees, 11-20. Paper SecondWorldWar endofthe “German” communitiesforEasternEuropeatthe the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union. European the of Enlargement Eastern the Palgrave Macmillan. Basingstoke: transition University Press. Princeton Princeton: in Serbia. South EasternEurope Research Report no.1, pp.47-80. . Aldershot: Ashgate. . Aldershot: Orientalism . Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Grasping thedemocratic peace:Principles apost-Coldfor Warworld Theories of Europeanintegration East Central Europebetween thetwo WorldWars 2, no. 34 2, (27 August):30-7. Search for security: A study in Baltic diplomacy, 1920-1934 diplomacy, Baltic study in security:A Search for Eine ChancefürMitteleuropa: bürgerlicheEmanzipationund International Organizations: ADictionary andDirectory Democracy andthemarket Democracy , ed. Duško Lopandi , ed. . New York: Pantheon. Democracy and development:Political Democracy and institutions and Journal ofBalticStudies , 191-210. New Wheatsheaf. Harvester , York: 339 . NewYork: Cambridge University Press. The OSCE andthemultiple challenges of International Organization: Polity, Politics Building democracy? Theinternational ü 1804-1914. , 73-83. Belgrade: European Belgrade:Movement, 73-83. European . Cambridge: Cambridge University . Cambridge: , ed.JanTeunisen, Joost 25-32.The . New York: Palgrave. International Organization , ed. Geoffrey Pridham, Eric Vienna: Überreuter. 19, no.2:101-16. Regional integration and Regional integration Regional cooperationin The expulsion ofthe . Seattle, London: Consequences of RFE/RL . 5 th ed. 55, , . . CEU eTD Collection Sked, Alan.1989. Šime Simon, Jeffrey. 2004. Smith, Steve. 2001. Foreign policy is what states make of it: Social construction and construction Social it: of make states what is policy Foreign 2001. Steve. Smith, In Theory. International to New approaches 1997. Smith, Steve. Smith, A.,Graham Martin Timmins. 2000. 1976. Skilling,Gordon. H. Skilling,Gordon. 1966. H. Simon, Jeffrey. 2003. Schulz,Fredrik Öjendal, Michael,Joakim Söderbaum, and ed.2001b. DefinitionsCentral Schöpflin, old 1989. andnew.In Europe: George. Silber, Laura, Allan Little. 1995. Shaw, Malcolm N. 2003. limits.Schürman,Confronting In 2001. Estonia:geostrategic Bernd. A 2001a.Introduction: Öjendal. andJoakim FredrikSchulz, Söderbaum, Michael, Schöpflin, 1993. George. Sedelmeier, Ulrich, Hellen Wallace. 2000. Eastern enlargement: Strategy or second or Strategy enlargement: Wallace. Eastern 2000. Ulrich, Hellen Sedelmeier, functionalism. In Neo-neo C.2004. Philippe Schmitter, Schimmelfennig,Frank. 2003. þ ka, Milan. 1989. Another civilization? Another civilization? 1989.Another civilization? ka, Milan. In Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. &Littlefield Rowman VendulkaNew York: Kubálková, 38-55. M.E. Sharpe. Publishers. &Littlefield Rowman Europe International Relations Theory. In Theory. Relations International Press. University Y. Crowell Company. York: Longman. Antje Wiener and Thomas Diez, 4 politics Schulz, Fredrik Söderbaum, Joakim and London:Öjendal, 1-21. ZedBooks. world: Acomparativeperspectiveand processes onactors,forms framework for understanding regionalization. In London: Zed Books. world:processes onactors,forms globalizing and perspective Acomparative enlargement incomparativeperspective 4 William Wallace, In thoughts? London: Lynne Rienner Publishers national debates Europe rhetoric , ed.GeorgeSchöpflin andNancyWood/ Totowa: Barnes & Nobles. , ed. John Baylis and Steve Smith, 165-90. New York: M.E. Sharpe. , ed.GeorgeSchöpflin andNancyWood Totowa: Barnes & Nobles. . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The decline and fall oftheHabsburgThe declineandfall Empire,1815-1918 Hungary andNATO:Problemsincivil-military relations Policy-making in the European Union Policy-making intheEuropean Poland Astudyincivil-militaryand NATO: relations International law Politics in EasternEurope, 1945-1992 , ed.Gale A.andArthur Mattox R.Rachwald, Boulder, 219-37. The governments ofcommunist EastEurope th Czechoslovakia’s revolution interrupted ed., 427-60. Oxford: ed., Oxford University Press. The EU, NATOEurope: Rules The EU, andtheintegrationof and Yugoslavia: Deatha ofnation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 5 340 -74. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Foreign policy inaconstructedworld Building a bigger Europe: and Building abigger EU NATO . Aldershot: Ashgate. European integration theory European Regionalization inaglobalizing . New York: TV Books. . Oxford: Blackwell. , ed. Hellen Wallace and Globalization and worldGlobalization Enlarging NATO: The Enlarging NATO: . Princeton: Princeton . Princeton: . New York: Thomas In SearchofCentral In Search ofCentral In Search Regionalization ina . London, New London, . , ed. Michael . Oxford: . Oxford: , ed. , ed. . CEU eTD Collection Todorova, Maria. 1994. The Balkans: From Todorova,invention. Maria.The 1994.Balkans:From discovery to 7Ę 1997. Maria. Todorova, Söderbaum, Fredrik.Introduction: 2003. ofnew Theories regionalism. In Tism Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1997. Translator’s preface. In Tism Thomas, Daniel andpolitical Accords In C. 1999.TheinEasternEurope. change Helsinki Thaden, C.1981. Edward Functionalism: Taylor,Paul In Mitrany. Theapproach David G. 1994.of 1990.A.J.P.Taylor, Sunkel, 2000.Development Osvaldo. and integration regional in America: Latin Another Stalvant, Carl-Einar. 1999. The Council of the Baltic Sea States. In Spulber, 1957. Nicolas. Thoenig, Jean-Claude. 2003.Institutional andtheories institutions: public Traditions and DouglasStuart, andThe theCold T.2001.United NATODoes States disputes: out-of-area kés, Rudolf L. 1991. From kés, RudolfKrakow: Cooperation,From L.Visegrád to and competition, 1991. ă ă neanu, Vladimir.2003. neanu, Vladimir.1992. December): 100-14. in coexistence Central Europe. Press. (Summer): 453-82. communism New York: Macmillan. York: New 21. Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. regionalism: APalgravereader University Press. University Risse, andC. Ropp, Stephen Kathryn Cambridge: Sikkink, 205-33. Cambridge The power ofhumanrights:Internationalnorms addomesticchange Pierre,127-37. London:Sage. Hamilton. Palgrave & Macmillan UNU/WIDER. Basingstoke: and Development chance for an unfulfilled promise? In &Hall. Chapman London: &Sons; Willey John Technology, of Institute Massachusetts of Press Technology Jacquesix-xc. Derrida, Baltimore: JohnsHopkins University Press. appropriateness. In appropriateness. University Press. Princeton Princeton: international co-operation years merely or In prologue? War precedents, provide Institute. Sea the Black to solidarityfromtheBarents prosperityand security, Europe: Building in theNew , ed. Gustav Schmidt,, ed. vol.1,123-40. NewYork: Palgrave. The Habsburg Monarchy,1809-1918 . University of California Press. , ed.Andrew Cottey, London: 46-68. Macmillanand EastWest Imagining theBalkans The economicscommunist EasternEurope of , ed. Björn, ed. András Hettne, Inotai and OsvaldoSunkel, 50-74. Russification inthe Baltic provinces and Finland,1855-1914 Handbook of Public Administration Handbook ofPublic Reinventing politics: Eastern EuropefromStalin toHavel Stalinism for allseasons:Stalinism for , ed. Paul G. Taylor and A.J.R. Groom. London: Pinter. , ed.Fredrik Söderbaum and Timothy M. Shaw, 1- Problems ofCommunism 341 New Regionalism and the Future of SecurityNew and the Futureof Regionalism . New York and Oxford: OxfordNew York andOxford: University . . London: Penguin Books, Hamish A history of NATO:A history of The first fifty A political history of Romanian A politicalhistory of Of grammatology Of , ed. B.Guy Peters and Jon Subregional cooperation 40, no. 6 (November- no. 40, Slavic Review . New York: The Theories of new Theories of Frameworks for Frameworks , corrected ed., , ed. Thomas 53, No.2 . . CEU eTD Collection Waltz, Kenneth. 1979. Walters, Francis Paul A. 1952. Walt, Stephen.1998.International many Oneworld,Relations: theories. Walt, Stephen.1991. The renaissance of Walt,The studies. of security renaissance Stephen.1991. Wallace, William, Roger Clark. 1986. Vachudova, Milada Anna.2005. Wæver, Ole, Barry Buzan, Morten Kelstrup, Pierre Lemaître. 1993. Lemaître.Pierre Kelstrup, Buzan, Morten Wæver, Ole, Barry Regionalismvon Gert.1987. Pistohlkors, asaconceptof Baltic historiography: Some Vellas, Pierre.1948. Vachudova, Milada Anna. 1993. The Visegrád Four: NoalternativeThe Visegrád cooperation? Four: Anna.1993. to Vachudova, Milada Trgov theory:Achievements,Torfing, arguments, andchallenges.In Jacob.2005.Discourse Velikonja,Slovenia’s 2003. Mitja. Yugoslav century. In Tonkiss,Fran. 1998.Analysing discourse. In Uvali United DevelopmentProgram. 1994. Nations Ullman, H.1996.Introduction: Richard Theworlds andYugoslavia’s wars.In David.Turnock, 2006. van Brabant, Jozef van Jozef Brabant, M. 1991. ü þ , Milica. 2002. Regional cooperation and the enlargement of Milica. enlargementof andthe 2002.Regional European the cooperation , Union: evi no.2: 211-39. University Press. University 29-32. and Conflict Research. and Conflict the new security agendain Europe the new Pedone. Paris: Press. introductory introductory remarks. Lesson learned? Lesson New York: Palgrave Macmillan. New York: Discourse theory inEuropeanpolitics London:Seale, Sage. 245-60. idea, 1918-1992 Foreign Relations. and Yugoslavia’swars Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. a idea,1918-1992Yugoslavism:failed Historiesof after communism after Research Report Human Development Reports. New York: United Nations Development Program. Rotledge.York: convertibility throughapayments union ü , Ljubinka. 2003. South Slav intellectuals and the creation of In of Yugoslavia. intellectualsSlav creation the and South 2003. , Ljubinka. Le regionalisme international etl’Organisationdes Nations Unies Theory of internationalpolitics The economy of East CentralThe economyofEast Europe,1815-1989 , ed.Dejan Djoki 2, no. 34 2, (27 August):38-47. International Political Science Review . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Journal ofBalticStudies A history ofthe League ofNations , ed. Richard H. Ullman, 1-8. New York: The Council on Integrating Eastern Europeintotheglobaleconomy: Europe undivided: Democracy,Europe undivided: leverageandintegration Comecon, trade andtheWest ü . London: Pinter; Copenhagen: Centre for Peace for Centre Copenhagen: Pinter; London: . , 84-99. Madison: The University Wisconsin Madison: The of University , 84-99. 342 , ed. David Howarth , ed.DavidHowarth and Jacob Torfing 1-32. New dimensions ofhumansecurity Researching societyandculture Researching . Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. . Reading: Addison-Wesley. Reading: . 18, no.2: 125-32. International Studies Quarterly Yugoslavism: Histories a failed of , ed. Dejan, ed. Djoki 23, no. 3: 319-33. 23,no. , vol.London: Oxford 1. . London: Pinter. London: . Identity, migrationand Foreign Policy . London, New , ed. Clive , ed. The World ü , 222-37. . UNDP RFE/RL 110: 35, . CEU eTD Collection Wolfers, Arnold. 1962. 2002. Whitehead, Laurence. The international Laurence.Whitehead, of In dimensions 1996. democratization. Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Wendt, Alexander. 1994.Collective formation identity and the international state. Wodak, Ruth.1989. Williamson, Samuel R. 1991. Antje, Diez,ed.2004. andThomas Wiener, Zehfuss, Maja. 2002. Wodak, ed.2003. and Ruth Weiss, Gilbert, 1974. Wandycz, Piotr. Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer,2001. ed. Zulean, Marian.Politica 2007. desecuritate na Yalem,Regionalism Ronald. 1962. andworld order. Wyat-Walter, Andrew.1995.Regionalism, world In and globalization, economics. Wolff, Stefan. 2006. Wolff,Larry. 1994. Wendt, Alexander. 1992.Anarchyis makewhat ofit: states Thesocial construction of Weiss, G.1996.Collective Thomas spinelessness:U.N. actions in In formerthe Yugoslavia. Ia institutions,Luciana processes], ed. AlexandraGhica andMarian 33-46. Zulean, Amsterdam: Benjamins. Oxford:Laurence Whitehead, 3-25. University Oxford Press. international dimensionsEurope andthe ofdemocratization:Americas Press. University na In policy]. public of field as a policy security [National Sage. Press. University University Press. University ScienceReview American Political University of Washington Press. London: Macmillan. London: Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Louise FawcettandAndrew Hurrell, Oxford: Oxford University 74-121. Press. Regionalism inworld politics: Regionalorganisations andinternational order politics. power Council on Foreign Relations. The World and Yugoslavia’s wars interdisciplinarity Enlightenment ú Ġ i: Polirom. ional ă : Concepte, instititu Inventing Eastern Europe: The map of civilization on the mind of the civilization onthemindof mapof The Inventing EasternEurope: Ethnic conflict: Aglobal perspective Language, power Studiesinpoliticaldiscourse and ideology: Constructivism ininternational relations: Thepolitics ofreality . Stanford: Stanford University Press. International Organization The landsofpartitionedPoland,1795-1918 Discord andcollaboration: Essays oninternational politics . Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Social theoryinternational politics of Democratization: Theoryandexperience Democratization: Austro-Hungary the Firstand theorigins Worldof War Ġ ii, procese , ed. RichardUllman,, ed. H. NewYork:The 59-96. 88,no.2:384-96. 343 Methods critical discourseof analysis European integrationtheory Critical discourse analysis: Theoryand Critical analysis: discourse Ġ ional 46,no.2: 391-425. International Affairs [National [National security policy: Concepts, ă ca domeniu al cadomeniu al publice politicilor . Oxford: Oxford University Press. . Cambridge: Cambridge Politica desecuritate 38,no.4: 460-71. . Seattle, London: Seattle, . . Oxford: Oxford . Oxford: . Oxford: Oxford . London: . , ed. , ed. The The . . . .