Analyzing The Importance Of The National Identity Concept On The Path To Europenization Process Of Serbia And Craotia

Öz

The international status quo had been changed rapidly after the breakdown of the communist regimes throughout Central and Eastern Europe at the end of 1989. The transition from communism to post-communist period had been more severe in the Balkans than other communist states of East Central Europe. States have been experiencing the building democracy, following the liberal economic principles and adapting to the universal values by international organizations, such as the European Union (EU). Although two Balkan States are in the similar regional status, shared communism and war experience, they have followed the quite different European trajectories. This article will briefly discuss the trend of decentralization of Yugoslavia in terms of reopening national question could be primarily motivated by the role of historical legacy, constitutional factors, and the role of intellectual elites and political actors. After giving some information about the dissolution process of the Yugoslavia, it will introduce an argument about the role of the national identity politics on the Europeanization processes of the states. The purpose of this paper is to understand the Europeanization process of Croatia and Serbia after the dissolution from the Yugoslavia. This research paper will develop the identity convergence and identity divergence mechanisms in order to explain successful or stalled Europeanization process of countries. In this research paper, historical comparative research technique based on methodological pluralism logic of qualitative research method will be used. While national identity convergence mechanism provides Croatia’s rapid accordance with EU requirements, national identity divergence mechanism had a negative impact on Serbia’s EU candidacy process. It is important to examine the history and roots of the dissolution of the Yugoslavia in order to explain how states national identity effect the process of Europenization, This article argues the Europeanization process of Serbia and Croatia states on the basis of the neo-functionalist and inter-governmentalist approach in order to understand the path on the EU. This paper analyses both the evolution of these two main theories in the post-war era and their impact on the development of the European project. These cases offer evidence that how these two states have perceived Europe, what it meant domestically, and how it was imagined profoundly shaped the trajectory of Europeanization. They will explain the question why similar international pressures on states produce different political outcomes on the states. National identity concept has to be taken seriously in order to understand what makes Europenization process difficult to achieve for states.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Serbia
• Croatia
• National Identity

Analyzing The Importance Of The National Identity Concept On The Path To Europenization Process Of Serbia And Craotia

Abstract

Kaynakça

1. Akvaham, P.(1995).Yugoslavia the former and Future.The Brookings institution, Washington.
2. Blitz, K, B.(2006).War and Changes in the Balkans, Nationalism , Conflict, and Cooperation, Cambridge university Press, New York.
3. Börzel, T. A and Risse, T.(2012).From Europeanisation to Diffusion: Introduction,West European Politics.
4. Cohen, J, L. and Soso, Dragovic, S.(2008).State collapse in South-Eastern Europe: New perspectives on Yugoslavia's disintegration. Purdue university Press, USA.
5. Crampton ,R,J.(2002),The Balkans since the Second World War, Longman, London.
6. Cohen, J, L. (1993). Broken Bonds. The disintegration of Yugoslavia, West view Press, Oxford.
7. Cierco, T.(2009).Europeanization Impact on Croatia’s Course to Democracy, Primavera, Nação e Defesa.
8. European Comission,(2007).Financial assistance is provided under the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance, (IPA) .

9. EU Commission (2014).Financial assistance is provided under the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance, (IPA) .
10. Ginsberg,R. and Michael E. S.(2005).Understanding the European Union As a Global Political Actor: Theory, Practice, And Impact,” Princeton University.
11. Gallagner, Tom,(2003).The Balkans After The Cold War,From tyranny to tragedy, Routledge Press, London and New York.
12. Hudson, Kate.(2003). Breaking the South Slav Dream, Pluto Press, London.
13. Ingra, W, C.(2009).Confronting the Yugoslav controversies: A scholars' initiative, Purdue university Press, USA.
14. Job, C.(2002).Yugoslavia’s Ruin ,The bloody lessons of Nationalism ,Littlefield Publishers, New York.
15. Jovic, D.(2001) The Disintegration of Yugoslavia: A Critical Review of Explanatory Approaches, European Journal of Social Theory.
16. Milacicic,F.(2020).Europenization and Statehood Problems: The Cases of Croatia and Serbia, Cambridge University Press.
17. Moga, T.L.(2009).The Contribution of the Neofunctionalist and Intergovernmentalist Theories to the Evolution of the European Integration Process, Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences. Nye, Joseph (2004). Soft power and American Foreign Policy, Political Science Quarterly.
18. Pavkovic, A.(2000).The Fragmentation of Yugoslavia, Macmillan Press, Great Britain.
19. Pavkovic,A.(2014).Yugoslavs and European :A Tale of Two Supranational İdentities,Research Gate.
20. Ramet, S.(1995).Nationalism and Federalism in Yugoslavia 1962-1991,Indiana University Press, USA.
21. Radaelli, C.M.(2003)The Europeanization of Public Policy. In Featherstone, K. and Radaelli, C.M. (eds) The Politics of Europeanization ,Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22. Ramet, S.(2007)The Dissolution of Yugoslavia: Competing Narratives of Resentment and Blame,Journal of Politics and Society, Southeast Europe.
23. Rupnik, J.(2011).The Balkans as a European question, European Union Institute for Security Studies.
24. Singleton, F.(1993). A Short History of Yugoslav Peoples, Cambridge University Press, USA.
25. Sigleton,F. (2006).A short History of Yugoslav People, Cambridge University Press, (1993), 23.
26. Sedelemeier, U.(2011).Europeanisation in New and Candidate States,Living Reviews in European Governance.
27. Schimmelfennig, F. and Engert, S. & Knobel, H. (2003).Costs, Commitment, Compliance: Latvia, Slovakia and Turkey’, Journal of Common Market Studies.
28. Schimmelfennig, Frank and Ulrich Sedelmeier (2004).Governance by Conditionality: EU Rule Transfer to the Candidate Countries of Central and Eastern Europe, Journal of European Public Policy.
29. Schimmelfennig,F. and Sedelmeier, U. (2011).Governance by Conditionality: EU Rule Transfer to the Candidate Countries of Central and Eastern Europe’. Journal of European Public Policy.
30. Vachudova, M. Anna,(2014).EU Leverage and National Interests in the Balkans: The Puzzles of Enlargement Ten Years On.
31. Vejvoda,I and Dyker, D.A,(1996).Yugoslavia and After”, Longman, London.
32. Willer, Franke,(2002).The Social Construction of the Man ,the State and War, Routledge Press, New York, London.