scholarly journals The EU polycrisis and hard populism in East -Central Europe: From the Copenhagen dilemma to the Juncker paradox

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 7-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Attila Ágh

AbstractAnalyses of populism in East -Central Europe (ECE) necessarily depart from the general crisis of representative democracy in the EU and describe the ECE as a specifi c regional case reflecting the failure of the catch -up process. The first part of this article adopts this “classical” approach and considers the backsliding of ECE democracy alongside the rise of populist identity politics in the global context. In the second part, I turn to the historical trajectory of ECE populism as a “nested” or two -level game in the EU context of ECE developments. The third part of this article outlines the main contradictions in this process that has led to what I call the Juncker paradox. To understand this paradox, we need to return to what the Commission noted in the early 2010s as the Copenhagen dilemma: aft er the EU accession of ECE states, the EU had no means to control rule -of -law violations and, in fact, supported autocratic populist ECE regimes through European transfers. This article explains the worsening of this situation in the late 2010s as the EU polycrisis caused Juncker’s Commission to focus on Core -based priorities and marginalise rule -of -law violations in ECE. This inaction and neglect have produced a special case of negative externalities - the Juncker paradox - that has largely been counterproductive and further strengthened anti -EU populism in all ECE countries, especially Hungary and Poland. Despite this situation, I conclude that Juncker’s 2017 State of the Union address should be a turning point in the EU’s policy towards ECE; in particular, it should promote a better understanding of the regional situation and more effective enforcement of the rule of law.

2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacques Rupnik ◽  
Jan Zielonka

The countries of East-Central Europe (ECE) embarked on a democratic transition in 1989 were proclaimed consolidated democracies when they joined the European Union (EU) in 2004. Today most of the new democracies are experiencing “democratic fatigue” and some seem vulnerable to an authoritarian turn. The EU, seen as the guarantor of the post-1989 democratic changes, is experiencing an unprecedented economic, financial, and democratic crisis with the combined challenges of technocracy and populism. The article explores the different approaches to the study of democracies in ECE, their specific features and vulnerabilities, and tries to provide an interpretation of the premature crisis of democracy in ECE in a broader transeuropean context.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 419-432
Author(s):  
Ladislav Cabada

AbstractThe development of new East-Central European (ECE) democracies after 1989 might be separated into two different parts regarding the external, but in many ways also the internal evaluation. While the first fifteen years, crowned the ‘big bang’ EU-enlargement in 2004, might be evaluated generally as a successful story of socialisation into the Western structures, i.e. democratisation and Europeanisation, the next fifteen years are often evaluated as the period of getting sober. Paradoxically, instead of a continuation of the Europeanisation of values, memory and identity in many ECE nations we can observe the strengthening of anti-EU and anti-European attitudes. As Ágh stressed in his latest works, as early as the 2008 financial crisis outbreak we have had to deal with the polycrisis situation accompanied with de-Europeanisation, failure in the catching up process, the strengthening of the Core-Periphery divide in the EU/ Europe and the decline of democracy in East-Central Europe. Even the migration crisis in 2015 and beyond strengthened the mental gaps between so-called ‘old’ and ‘new’ Europe. In the article I focus on reasons for the semi-peripheral position of ECE, long durée processes in the creation of European macro-regions, and specific features of ECE nations’ identity. I reject the black-and-white division of Europe into two regions, stressing the positive examples from ECE as well as many problems of democratic governance the EU – including the ‘West’ – faces.


2003 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 273-292
Author(s):  
SHARON L. WOLCHIK

Over a decade has passed since the heady days of 1989 and 1990 when communist governments fell one after the other and almost all political parties taking part in elections shared the same goals: Democracy, the Market, and Back to Europe. In December 2002, the efforts of the new leaders of these countries to ‘return to Europe’ bore fruit in an event that many had in 1989 regarded as too farfetched to imagine, the invitation of most of the countries in the region to join the EU in 2004 or 2007. The culmination of a decade-long process of harmonization and negotiation, this invitation symbolized the success of these countries in instituting political democracies and market economies. But how complete is this process, particularly in the political realm?


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Vermeersch

To a large extent, the traditional narrative of EU integration has revolved around reconciliation and peace-building after the Second World War. This article examines how current memory work in nationalist movements in East-Central Europe subverts this moral story and uses it as the basis for a politics of backlash against the EU. Recent developments in national commemoration and remembrance practices in the region have enabled not only the glorification of the national past but also the suppression of 'heretical' interpretations of specific traumatic historical episodes. The fault lines of national belonging are now often used to eclipse stories of post-war state reconciliation in Europe and focus directly on the victimised population. As a result, commemorations carry strong normative and moral overtones related to justice and culpability. Nationalism in this context has received moral connotation and, vice versa, questions of morality become questions of nationhood. The 'we' of this distinguishing work embodies a subject of immaculate historical innocence and victimhood; by extension, the 'others' always bear responsibility and guilt. This nationalist moral classification work changes and reframes the moral underpinnings of the EU enlargement. The victim theme has adhered a strong potential to garner solidarity among various social groups in East-Central Europe against the EU. The role of victimiser is easily projected onto both the abstract notion of the 'European elites' and the supposed allies of those elites: the internal 'others'.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document