The Contemporary EU's Notion of Territoriality and External Borders
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/v10105-011-0010-3Keywords:
Europe, EU, borders, territoriality, modern state, Eastern EuropeAbstract
The predominant spatial conception of the EU contributes to an evident emergence of a sharpened territorial building of the European space. By all evidence the idea of both the territorial cohesion and territorial continuity shows how relevant the notion of territoriality in the ‘European discourse’ is and consequently how accepted the instrument of hard and closed border and the sharp inside/outside dichotomy are. Due to this pragmatic notion of territoriality, the idea of the EU as a ‘non-Westphalian new empire’ (according to the ‘neo-medieval paradigm’) became at least unrealistic. Its borders are getting more territorial, physical and visible. Hard border policies and practices on the Eastern and Western Balkan borders mirror the existence of a de facto barrier and of a deep ‘Westphalian memory’ in the way of using the territory as support of political unity.
Downloads
References
AGNEW, J. (1994), ‘The Territorial Trap: The Geographical Assumption of International Relations Theory’, Review of International Political Economy, 1, pp. 53-88.
Google Scholar
ALBRECHT, H. (2002), ‘Fortress Europe?-Controlling Illegal Immigration’, European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 10 (1), pp. 1-22.
Google Scholar
ANDERSON, J. (1995), ‘The Exaggerated Death of the Nation-State’, [in:] ANDERSON, J., BROOK, C. and COCHRANE, A. (eds), A Global World? Re-ordering Political Space, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
ANDERSON, J. (1996), ‘The Shifting Stage of Politics: New Medieval and Post-Modern Territorialities?’, Environmental Planning, 14 (2), pp. 133-153.
Google Scholar
ANDERSON, J. (2007), ‘Singular Europe: An Empire Once Again?’, [in:] ARMSTRONG, W. and ANDERSON, J. (eds), Geopolitics of the European Union Enlargement: the Fortress Empire, London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
ANDERSON, J. and O'DOWD, L. (1999), ‘Borders, Border Regions and Territoriality: Contradictory Meanings’, Changing Significance, Regional Studies, 33 (7), pp. 593-604.
Google Scholar
ANDREAS, P. (2003), ‘Redrawing the Line. Borders and Security in the Twenty-First Century’, International Security, 28 (2), pp. 78-111.
Google Scholar
BADIE B. (1995), La fin des territoires. Essai sur e désordre international et sur l'utilité sociale du respect, Paris: Fayard.
Google Scholar
BATT, J. and WOLCZUK, K. (eds), (2002), Region, State and Identity in Central and Eastern Europe, London: F. Cass.
Google Scholar
BEICHELT, T. (2004), ‘Autocracy and Democracy in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine’, Democratization, 11 (5), pp. 113-132.
Google Scholar
BOEDELTJE, F. and HOUTUM, H. van (2008), ‘The Abduction of Europe: A Plea for Less Unionism and More Europe’, Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 99 (3), pp. 361-365.
Google Scholar
BÖRÖCZ, J. (2001), ‘Introduction: Empire and Coloniality in the ‘Eastern Enlargement’ of the European Union’, [in:] BÖRÖCZ, J. and KOVACS, M. (eds), Empire's New Clothes. Unveiling EU Enlargement. e-book: Central European Review online.
Google Scholar
BURGESS, P. J. (2009), ‘The New Nomos for Europe’, Geopolitics, 14 (1), pp. 135-160.
Google Scholar
DEBARDELEBEN, J. (ed), (2005), Soft or Hard Borders? Managing the Divide in an Enlarged Europe, London: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2003, March 11), Wider Europe-Neighbourhood: a New Framework for Relations with our Southern and Eastern Neighbours, Brussels: Communication from the Commission to the Council and the Parliament
Google Scholar
FITZGERALD, R. and MICHIE, R. (1997), ‘The Evolution of the Structural Funds’, [in:] BACHTLER, J. and TUROK I., The Coherence of EU Regional Policy. Contrasting Perspectives on the Structural Funds, London: Jessica Kingsley.
Google Scholar
GEDDES, A. (2001), ‘International Migration and State Sovereignty in an Integrating Europe’, International Migration, 39 (6), pp. 21-42.
Google Scholar
HARVEY, C. (2000), ‘Dissident Voices: Refuges, Human Rights and Asylum in Europe’, Social and Legal Studies, 9 (3), pp. 367-396.
Google Scholar
HOUTUM, H. van (2002), ‘Borders of Comfort: Spatial Economic Bordering Processes in the European Union’, Regional and Federal Studies, 12 (4), pp. 37-57.
Google Scholar
HOUTUM, H. van, and PIJPERS, R. (2007), ‘The European Union as a Gated Community: The Two-Faced Border and Immigration Regime of the EU’, Antipode, 39 (2), pp. 291-309.
Google Scholar
IBRYAMOVA, N. V. (2004), ‘Security, Borders, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union’ http://www.miami.edu/eucenter/ibryamovasecurityfinal.pdf
Google Scholar
ISLAM, S. (1994), ‘Fortress Europe’, Index on Censorship, 23 (3), pp. 37-43.
Google Scholar
LAYARD, R., BLANCHARD, O., DORNBUSCH, R. and KRUGMAN, P. (1992), East-West Migration: The Alternatives, Tokyo: The United Nations University.
Google Scholar
LEITNER, H. (1995), ‘International Migration and the Politics of Admission and Exclusion in Postwar Europe’, Political Geography, 14 (3), pp. 259-278.
Google Scholar
MAMADOUH, V. (2001), ‘The Territoriality of European Integration and the Territorial Features of the European Union’, Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 92 (4), pp. 420-436.
Google Scholar
MOSTOV, J. (2008), Soft Borders. Rethinking Sovereignty and Democracy, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar
NEWMAN, D. and PAASI, A. (1998), ‘Fences and Neighbours in the Postmodern World: Boundary Narratives in Political Geography’, Progress in Human Geography, 22 (2), pp.186-207.
Google Scholar
PAASI, A. (2001), ‘Europe as a Social Process and Discourse: Considerations of Place, Boundaries and Identity’, European Urban and Regional Studies, 8 (1), pp. 7-28.
Google Scholar
PAVLIUK, O. (1997), ‘Ukrainian-Polish Relations: A Pillar of Regional Stability?’, [in:] WOHLFELD, M. (ed.), The Effects of Enlargement on Bilateral Relations in Central and Eastern Europe, Paris: Institute for Security Studies WEO, pp. 43-62.
Google Scholar
PHILIPOTT, D. (2001), Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
RATTI, R. and REICHMAN, S. (1993), Theory and Practice of Transborder Cooperation, Basel-Frankfurt a. M.: Helbing & Lichtenhahn.
Google Scholar
REUT, O. (2000), ‘Republic of Karelia: A Double Asimmetry or North-Eastern Dimensionalism’, COPRI Working Paper, 13, Copenhagen: Peace Research Institute.
Google Scholar
RUGGIE, J. G. (1993), ‘Territoriality and Beyond: Problematizing Modernity in International Relations’, International Organization, 47 (1), pp. 139-174.
Google Scholar
SIBLEY, D. (1995), Geographies of Exclusion: Society and Differences in the West, Routledge: London.
Google Scholar
SIDAWAY, J. (2006), ‘On the Nature of the Beast: Re-charting Political Geographies of the European Union’, Geografiska Annaler, 88 B (1), pp. 1-14.
Google Scholar
SPRUYT, H. (1994), The Sovereign States and its Competitors. An Analysis of Systems Change, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar
TIMMERMANN, H. (1997), ‘Belarus: eine Diktatur im Herzen Europas?’, Berichte des Bundesinstituts für Ostwissenschaftliche und Internationale Studien, 10, Köln. Treaty Establishing a Consitution for Europe (2005), Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Commission.
Google Scholar
WALLACE, W. (1999), ‘The Sharing of Sovereignty: The European Paradox’, Political Studies, 48.
Google Scholar
ZIELONKA, J. (2006), Europe as Empire: The Nature of the Enlarged European Union, New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
ZIELONKA, J. (ed.), (2002), Europe Unbound: Enlarging and Reshaping the Boundaries of the European Union, London-New York: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
