1 / 12

“Re- cognizing ENP” Olivier Kramsch and Henk van Houtum

EUDIMENSIONS Final Project Conference “Local Dimensions of a Wider European Neighbourhood” May 7, 2009 Representation of the German State of Brandenburg 108 Rue Joseph II, Brussels. “Re- cognizing ENP” Olivier Kramsch and Henk van Houtum Nijmegen Centre for Border Research (NCBR).

vega
Download Presentation

“Re- cognizing ENP” Olivier Kramsch and Henk van Houtum

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EUDIMENSIONS Final Project Conference “Local Dimensions of a Wider European Neighbourhood”May 7, 2009Representation of the German State of Brandenburg108 Rue Joseph II, Brussels “Re-cognizing ENP” Olivier Kramsch and Henk van Houtum Nijmegen Centre for Border Research (NCBR)

  2. Port Bou, Spain

  3. Benjamin’s 19th Century Dream-Time Passage des Panoramas, Paris (1898)

  4. Benjamin’s ‘Here and There, Now and Then’: Refuting Linear ‘Progress” • The task: not to show how the past of the Arcades influences the present, nor how the present sheds its light on the past (= theory of ‘progress’)… • … but to reveal in the ruins of the arcades a historical ‘truth’  ‘awakening’ into a spatialized ‘now of recognizability’ • By way of a new ‘angle of vision’, drawing a redemptive new border which rescues elements that have the capacity to ‘fan the spark of hope in the past’, to wrest historical tradition ‘anew… from a conformism that is about to overpower it’ (Benjamin, Illuminations, p. 255)

  5. What is the EU’s ‘angle of vision’ on the ‘Neighbourhood’? Hypothesis: The modern(izing) logic of enlargement haunts European Neighborhood space  contradictions and entanglements of the political frontier.

  6. Imperial Frontiers: Norms and Forms • No firm border, but a ring of zones regulated by contact, mutual penetration, and exchange of gifts, tributes and trade (Febvre, 1935) • Universalizing elite norms, values and scripts projected from centers break down and must be reinvented (ie, role of frontiers, enclaves and penal colonies as ‘laboratories’ for modern forms of territorial rule) • A space of paradox consistent with the contradictory logics of modern European nation-building (liberty/freedom vs security) • An epistemological space of restless expansion, always escaping spatio-temporal enclosure  ‘frontier thinking’ (Turner, 1893; Curzon, 1907)

  7. Myths of the Frontier I: Against Seeing ENP through an ‘Enlargement Angle’ “Enlargement has been a key tool in projecting stability across our continent. But it is a reality that the EU cannot expand ad infinitum – everything has its limits. We must honour our present basic commitments, while strictly insisting on the criteria. One of these criteria is our own absorption capacity - it is clear that in some M[ember] S[tates] the pace and scale of enlargement is approaching the limits of what public opinion will accept. To overstretch, rather than consolidate, the Union would be detrimental not only for us but also our partners.” (Landaburu, 2006)

  8. Myths of the Frontier II: ‘Same Conditionality’ as Enlargement “[T]he neighbourhood policy is based on the same sort of positive conditionality which underpins the enlargement process. It is a two way process which requires significant willingness to change on the part of our neighbours. Only as they fulfil their commitments on the rule of law, democracy and respect for human rights; market-oriented economic reforms, and on foreign policy objectives, can we offer an even deeper relationship. There is no question of our forcing change or trying to impose reforms – we have sufficient examples around the globe of the problems with such an approach. Rather we will offer concrete support to our neighbours on their way towards shared prosperity, security and stability.” (Hübner, 2006; emphasis added)

  9. Myths of the Frontier III: Improving ‘Coherence, Effectiveness.. Visibility” “So our communications strategy takes a two-fold approach, telling our story both within the EU – talking more about substance and less about institutions, and externally – communicating with publics across the world about what the EU stands for and the values we promote. We aim to tackle the sentiment expressed by Madeleine Albright that ‘To understand Europe you have to be a genius’!” (Ferrero-Waldner, 2006)

  10. Myths of the Frontier IV: Anxious Provincializations The ‘strategic landscape’ which existed immediately following eastward enlargement in May, 2004 has given way to a ‘more menacing one, given threats to European values bearing down on the EU from all sides.” (Emerson et al, 2007)

  11. Profane Illumination? Mapping the ‘Threat’

  12. Looking Past the Chimney Hole: From ‘Strategic Landscapes’ to the Challenge of ‘Worldliness’ “The true method of making things present is: to represent them in our space (not to represent ourselves in their space)... It is, in essence, the same with the aspect of great things from the past – the cathedral of Chartres, the temple of Paestrum: to receive them into our space (not to feel empathy with their builders or their priests).” (Benjamin, First sketches, p.846)

More Related