CUING EUROSKEPTICISM, OR WHAT PARTIES MAKE OF IT European Integration and the Strategic Use of Its Consequences A dissertation presented by Liubomir Kiriloff Topaloff to The Department of Political Science In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the field of Political Science Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts December, 2009 1 | Page © Copyright by Liubomir K. Topaloff 2009 All Rights Reserved 2 | Page To my wonderful Natalia, Theo and Nona, my mother and father. And to the living memory of my grandfather Lubo, and my beloved Nikiphor, Caesar and Mauro 3 | Page CUING EUROSKEPTICISM, OR WHAT PARTIES MAKE OF IT European Integration and the Strategic Use of Its Consequences by Liubomir Kiriloff Topaloff ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Northeastern University, December 2009 4 | Page Abstract Growing evidence points to the salience of European integration in the domestic political discourse of European member-states. Party-based euroscepticism is an intense point of contestation between different schools of thought. The current study defines euroscepticism as a socially and politically constructed strategy employed by peripheral political elites. The majority of the existing research focuses on inter- or intra-party dissent as a new dimension of existing social cleavages, therefore studying the popular attitudes towards Europe in the member-states. While this approach has its merits and accounts for some of the characteristics of opposition to European integration, it does not address adequately the oscillation of marginal party positions with regard to the European issue across time and electoral systems. This work focuses on the strategic nature of party-based euroscepticism. The theoretical model offered in this study facilitates understanding the processes of issue evolution and its establishment as a salient point of contestation. The current work addresses in particular the following questions: How to explain the volatile variability of party positions with regard to European integration across electoral systems, across party blocs, and across time? What are the conditions, under which an issue, such as the European integration, is politicized and how? And what are the consequences from the politicization of the European issue for the process of political contestation? 5 | Page Acknowledgments The topic of this dissertation is due to an accident, in a manner of speaking. While writing a paper on how Greek national identity was gradually constructed in the late 18th and 19th centuries, I came across certain evidence about the controversies surrounding the debate regarding the role of the Byzantine Empire and Ancient Greece´s lustrous heritage in this process. The rationale behind the early Greek nationalists to reject the potential links of a newly created Greek nation-state with its ancient roots, only to discover the immense legitimizing power this romanticized image held for the political and cultural elites of the European Great Powers, and embrace it, brought an inevitable association with certain dynamics of contemporary party politics in European Union. The ability of entrepreneurial political elites to spot opportunities, and to exploit them to their best advantage, even if this requires them to make a 180 degree turn in their previous positions, is hardly a characteristic of contemporary political discourse. Little has changed with regard to how politics has been undertaken throughout the centuries; only the actual context and the structural limitations have changed. Deconstructing this enduring characteristic of the political process has challenged my intellectual curiosity, the outcome of which has resulted in writing the current work. 6 | Page Acknowledgments My deep gratitude for the successful completion of this dissertation goes first to the members of my dissertation committee. I was fortunate to have the guidance and intellectual illumination of my advisor, Professor Amílcar Antonio Barreto throughout the process of conceptualizing, researching, and writing the current work. Not coincidently, it was for his class that I wrote the paper on Greek national identity. His inspirational spell and eloquence made him my natural choice for guiding and advising me in the dissertation writing process I was about to embark. He knew as well as I did that this would be a big challenge. I am immensely grateful that he accepted this challenge and went along with me in this process. Without his encouragement, patience to read and work on the drafts – from the big revisions, to the small details – this project would not have been possible in its current version. Naturally, my first acknowledgment goes to him in full recognition of the intellectual impact, direct and indirect, his works, his classes, his advisorship, his mentorship and I dare to say his friendship had on me and my worldview as a researcher and as a person. I would like to thank also to my two other readers. Professor Ronald Hedlund’s guidance on how to stay on solid research grounds, and his very helpful advice “the best dissertation is the done dissertation” resonated with me and kept me from losing focus throughout the process of writing. I am also grateful for all the helpful comments and for the close editing of my manuscript to Professor Dimitar Bechev at the European Studies Centre at St. Antony's 7 | Page Acknowledgments College, University of Oxford. His extensive and detailed notes improved immensely the quality of my work. I must recognize here the support the Department of Political Science gave to me during the past years. I was fortunate enough to be among the continuous recipients of the Senior Graduate Assistantship award, thanks to which financial side I was able to continue working on my research. My recognition in that context goes to Professor John Portz, chair of the Department of Political Science, whose support and encouragement must be fully recognized. I am grateful also to Professor William Crotty, whose mentorship and inspiration can be found in many of my elaborations on the principles of democracy and democratization throughout the dissertation, as well as for the impact my research position at the Center for the Study of Democracy had on my overall academic curiosity. It is customary in such cases to acknowledge the support of those, without whom the current outcome would not have been possible. I cannot think of anyone who deserves more acknowledgment than my wife, Natalia, whose infinite patience, support and endurance allowed me to persist through very tough times in the past years. Among all the people who supported me throughout this process, often inadvertently, she was the first one to see this project completed and the milestone passed on. I am the most fortunate person in the world to have her next to me. Undoubtedly, the process of research in political science is by any standard extremely solitary métier and I cannot begin to imagine how I 8 | Page Acknowledgments would have been ever able to go through this process without her presence, support, understanding, and love. For this, and also many other reasons, мила моя, искрено и смирено ти благодаря! This dissertation is inseparably connected also to two of the most important events in my life, the birth of my son Theodossee and of my daughter Nona. In some ways, the dissertation was born and grew in size, substance and complexity along with the growth of my kids. It is now time that they surpass it. I started the process of writing of this dissertation believing that the old Latin proverb Omnium gradium difficillmus est primus will prove right. Every time I am embarking on a new adventure, I remember that proverb and the beginning becomes easy. I can firmly say now that this time it did not. In the process of writing the dissertation the first step was just as difficult as it is this last step I am completing at the moment. The work on the dissertation challenged not only my intellectual potential. It challenged my understanding of myself, as well as my worldview. For the past few years I kept reminding myself the words of great warning inscribed on the Temple of Apollo in Delphi Γνῶθι σαυτόν! I can finally say that with the completion of this dissertation I am at least one step closer to that goal. The Sisiphus myth of knowledge is alive and the mountain is steep and high. But my determination is unabated! 9 | Page Acknowledgments To all people mentioned above, and to all those whom I have, knowingly or unknowingly neglected to acknowledge and extend my gratitude, Maximus Gratias Ago Vos! December 2009 Northeastern University Boston, USA 10 | Page TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................................................................................. 4 Acknowledgments............................................................................................................ 6 Chapter 1 ......................................................................................................................... 13 Chapter 2 ......................................................................................................................... 42 The Road to Euroscepticism .................................................................................... 42 Integration as Elite-Driven Process ........................................................................