Avrupalılaşma Avrupalı mı?

Bu makalenin amacı ‘Avrupalılaşma’ sürecinin Avrupalılar tarafından nasıl algılandığını değerlendirmektir. İlk olarak, Avrupalılaşma kavramı, küreselleşme ve yerelleşme kavramları ile karşılaştırılmalı olarak analiz edilecektir. İkinci olarak, ‘Berlusconi-Schulz meselesi’ olarak literatüre giren tartışma, Avrupa’yı ilgilendiren bir meselenin, farklı Avrupa ülkeleri kamuoylarınca nasıl ve neden farklı olarak algılandığı sorularına yanıt bulmak için kullanılacaktır. Meseleye farklı kamuoylarınca geliştirilen farklı yaklışmların, ulusal tartışma düzeyinden öteye geçememesi, Avrupalılaşma ve Avrupa Kimliği diye adlandırılan kavramların, ulus-devlet paradigmasını aşma konusunda henüz yeterli olmadıkları sonucuna vurgu yapacaktır. Üçüncü olarak, uluslar-üstü hareketlere karşı düzenlenen üç ayrı karşıt-kampanya mercek altına yatırılacak ve Avrupalılaşma kavramının, küreselleşme süreci karşısındaki konumu değerlendirmeye alınacaktır. Avrupa kamuoyunun aktivist kanadının, Avrupalılaşma sürecini, küreselleşmenin neoliberal etkilerinin bir sonucu olarak görmesi, bu sürecin yalnızca ulusal paradigmayı değil, küresel paradigmayı da aşmak, ya da onlara bir alternatif üretmek, konusunda yetersiz olduğunu gösterecektir. Dördüncü olarak, Eurobarometre araştırmalarından yararlanılarak, değerlendirilen bu iki ayrı çalışmanın, Avrupa Kimliği tartışmalarında nereye oturtulabileceği konusunda fikir üretilecektir. Sonuç bölümünde ise, Avrupa kamuoyunun, tartışılan konu bir Avrupa meselesi dahi olsa, bu konuyu Avrupalılaşma kavramı dahilinde almak yerine, yerel ya da küresel boyuta taşıma (indirgeme veya yükseltme) taraftarı olduğu gösterilmeye çalışılacak; kimliksiz bir Avrupalılaşmanın geleceği üzerine tartışmalarda bulunulacaktır.

İs Europeanization European?

The purpose of this paper is to observe how the Europeanization process is perceived by Europeans. First, it is attempted to define the concept of Europeanization with particular references to the concepts of globalization and localization. While the former denotes an inevitable development of ‘world-wide interconnectedness’ in governmental, economic, security-related and technological issues, hence based on a functional logic; the latter is being fed from essentialist-culturalist ties constructed between people and their territories. The position of Europeanization is represented in-between with the disadvantage of the obvious lack of both functional inevitability and cultural awareness. Second, the so-called ‘Berlusconi-Schulz Case’ will be analyzed in order to demonstrate how 'European' issues gain dissimilar attention from different national bases in the European Continent. Since the source of the dissimilarity of public reaction to a supposedly European matter is still national – i.e., while Berlusconi is regarded not as the President of the European Council of Ministers, but as an Italian, and Schulz is only a German, not a deputy in the European Parliament –, and their friction is perceived as ‘a clash of nations’; it is at ease to claim that Europeanization or the discussions upon the European Identity are still having trouble moving away from the nationalist paradigm, let alone constructing an alternative to it. Third, a study concerning the transnational movements' campaigns will be added into the discussion, yet this time, observing why Europeanization does not constitute an 'alternative' to the globalization process in the eyes of the sensitive side of the European public. The responses obtained from the participants to those protests reveal that Europeanization, from the standpoint of the activists, is regarded as one of the by-products of the neo-liberal globalization, manufactured in a purely capitalistic laissez-faire logic. They also insist that thus far regional unification in Europe has failed to generate the alternative for the malign dimensions of globalization, and only if a more social, more welfare-oriented Europe, sensitive to the rates of unemployment, poverty, and fair-trade, is secured, then it would make sense to mention a unique process of Europeanization. The two consecutive studies indicate in common that when it comes to Europeanization, Europeans tend to devalue the process either from a national or a global viewpoint and prefer discussing European issues as either demoted to the local level or raised into the global level, respectively. Eurobarometer studies will be employed, fourthly, for associating and assessing the findings of these two separate fields of analysis with the concept of European Identity. Since the mid-1980s, when the process of European integration have been taking a more political stance in addition to its economic rationale, the unification in Europe have been heralded also on the cultural basis. Accordingly, the peoples of Europe share a cultural, historical, territorial, and traditional common ground such that culturally they are bound as well to have a common identity. The introduction of a European flag, anthem, motto (‘unity in diversity’), calendar, passports, driving licenses, the freedom of factors of production, and the concept of European citizenship have been designed specifically for giving the process of Europeanization a sense of a common identity. However, as the Eurobarometer results demonstrate, the efforts to construct (or to remind of) such identity have so far failed. The association with ‘Europeanness’ is way behind of the Europeans’ self-identification with their national or sub-national identities. The inter-national differences are still valued over the continent-wide cultural connectedness. Therefore, Europeanization has been hovering above Europe with no actual identity attached to it. Combining the results of the three studies, it might be concluded that Europeanization has not yet been able to gain a true European identity, and the underlying reason might be found in that the two dominant sources of world politics today, i.e., the national-level identification and global-level interconnectedness of people, economics and politics, have still profound impact on the perception of Europeans, which inevitably undervalue the process of Europeanization and makes it insignificant in the eyes of its addressees.

PDF

___

AB Belgesi. (2006), Standard Eurobarometer 66, Yayım: Aralık 2006, ss 7-12.
AB Belgesi. (2003), European Parliament “Session of July 2, 2003.”, ss. 32.
AB Belgesi. (1997), Amsterdam Antlaşması, Bölüm Bir: Madde 1.3. Ekim 2, 1997.
AB Belgesi . (1996a), Standard Eurobarometer 44, Yayım: Nisan 1996.
AB Belgesi. (1996b), Standard Eurobarometer 45, Yayım: Aralık 1996, ss. 43-46.
AMİN, Samir .(2007), Avrupa-merkezcilik, Sert, M. (Fransızcadan çev.), ilk bas. 1988, İstanbul: Nemesis Kitaplığı.
ANDERSON, Benedict (1991), Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, yeniden basım., ABD: Verso.
ANDRETTA, M. and MOSCA, L., (2001), “Globalization vs. Europeanization: do differences matter for transnational movements‟ campaigns and activists?”, sunum, 1st YEN Research Meeting on Europeanization, Siena, İtalya.
BLOOM, William (1993), Personal Identity, National Identity and International Relations, Birleşik Krallık: Cambridge Üniversitesi Yayınları.
BOURDIEU, Pierre (1998), “Utopia of Endless Exploitation: The Essence of Neo-liberalism”, Le Monde Diplomatique, 8 Aralık 1998.
CAPORASO, J., RISSE, T.,and COWLES, M. G. (eds.) (2001), Transforming Europe: Europeanization and Domestic Change, ABD: Cornell Üniversitesi Yayınları.
CHABANET, D., Curie, M. (2001), Les Marches européennes contre le chomage, la précarité et les exclusions, sunum, the Swiss Congress of Society and Sociology, İsviçre.
CHOMSKY, Noam (1999), Profit over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order. ABD: Seven Stories.
CONAN, Marie-Paule (2000), “An Active European Social Movement on the Road”, European Marches Archives: Nice 2000, Mobilization of the Marches for a Social Europe, Fransa.
ÇIRAKMAN, Aslı (2001), “Avrupa Fikrinden, Avrupa Merkezciliğe”, Doğu Batı, sayı 14, ss. 28-46.
DELANTY, G. and RUMFORD, C. (2005), Rethinking Europe: Social Theory and Implications of Europeanization, Birleşik Krallık: Routledge.
DELANTY, Gerard (1995) “The Limits and Possibilities of a European Identity: A Critique of Cultural Essentialism”, Philosophy and Social Criticism, cilt. 21, no. 4, pp. 15-36.
DIEZ, Thomas (2004), “Europe‟s Others and the Return of Geopolitics”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, cilt. 17, no. 2 (Haziran), pp. 319-335.
DINAN, Desmond (1999), Ever Closer Union, pg. 184-194, Birleşik Krallık: PalgraveMacmillan.
DOWNEY, J. & KOENIG, T., (2004) “Nationalization vs. Europeanization vs. Globalization of Issues that Should Belong to the European Public Sphere”, sunum, the ESA Conference New Directions in European Media, Kasım 5-7.
EDER, K. and SPOHN, W. (2005), Collective Memory and European Identity: The Effects of Integration and Enlargement, Birleşik Krallık: Ashgate.
FEATHERSTONE, K. and RADAELLI, C. M. (2003), The Politics of Europeanization, ABD: Oxford Üniversitesi Yayınları.
FINKIELKRAUT, Alain (1985), “What is Europe?”, New York Review of Books, cilt. 32, no. 19, Aralık 5, 1985.
GASCHE, Rodolphe (2008), Europe, or the Infinite Task: A Study of A Philosophical Concept, ABD: Stanford Üniversitesi Yayınları.
GELLNER, Ernest (1983), Nations and Nationalism, Birleşik Krallık: Blackwell. GINSBORG, Paul (2001), Italy and its Discontents: Family, Civil Society, State 1980-2001. Birleşik Krallık: Penguin Kitapları.
GRAZINO, P., and VINK, M..P. (2008), Europeanization: New Research Agendas, Birleşik Krallık: Palgrave Macmillan.
HABERMAS, Jürgen (2006), The Divided West, Birleşik Krallık: Polity.
HABERMAS, Jürgen (1992), “Citizenship and National Identity: Some Reflections on the Future of Europe”, Praxis International, cilt. 12, no. 1, pp. 1-19.
HEADLEY, John M. (2008), The Europeanization of the World: On the Origins of Human Rights and Democracy, ABD: Princeton Üniversitesi Yayınları.
HELD, D. And McGREW, A. (2005), „The Great Globalization Debate: An Introduction‟, Held, D. ve McGrew, A., The Global Transformations Reader, Birleşik Krallık: Polity.
HOBSBAWM, E. J. (1990), Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality, Birleşik Krallık: Cambridge Üniversitesi Yayınları.
HOFFMAN, Stanley (2002), “Clash of Globalizations”, Foreign Affairs, Temmuz/Ağustos 2002, cilt. 81, no. 4, pp. 104-109.
JAMES, P. and GOETZE, D. (2001), Evolutionary Theory and Ethnic Conflict, ABD: Praeger.
LAMY, Pascal (2000), Europe and Globalization, Sorbone Üniversitesi açılış konuşması, Paris, Haziran 16, 2000, Fransa.
LEVI, Primo (1979), If this is a Man. Birleşik Krallık: Abacus.
MATHERS, Andy, (1999), Euromarch-the struggle for a Social Europe. European Marches Arşivleri.
PAPARELLA, Emanuel (2005), A New Europe in Search of Its Soul: Essays on the European Union’s Cultural Identity and the Transatlantic Dialogue, Birleşik Krallık: AuthorHouse.
PAYNE, Anthony J. (2000), “Globalization and Modes of Regionalist Governance”, Jon Pierre (ed.) Debating Governance: Authority, Steering and Democracy, ABD: Oxford Üniversitesi Yayınları.
PRODI, Romano (2000), “Europe and Global Governance”, 2. COMECE Congress açılış konuşması, Brüksel, Mart 31, 2000.
RISSE, Thomas (2002), “Nationalism and Collective Identities: Europe versus the Nation State?”, Heywood, P., Jones, E. & Rhodes, M. (ed.) Developments in West European Politics, 2. baskı, Birleşik Krallık: Palgrave Macmillan.
RODDICK, Anita (2000), Localization: A Global Manifesto, Birleşik Krallık: Easrthscan.
ROSAMOND, Ben (2002), “Globalization and European Union”, sunum The European Union in International Affairs, National Europe Centre, Australian National University, Temmuz 3-4, 2002. Makale no:12.
SHORE, Chris (1996), “Transcending the Nation-State? The European Commission and the (Re)-Discovery of Europe”, Journal of Historical Sociology, cilt. 9, no. 4 (Aralık), pp. 473-496.
SMITH, Anthony D. (1992), “National Identity and the Idea of European Unity”, International Affairs, cilt. 68, no. 1 (Ocak), pp. 55-76.
SMITH, Anthony D. (1991) , National Identity, Birleşik Krallık: Penguin Kitapları.
SMITH, Anthony D. (1986), “Are Nations Modern?”, The Ethnic Origins of Nations, Kısım 1, Birleşik Krallık: Blackwell.
SMITH, Caitlin (2006), “Edmund Husserl and the Crisis of Europe”, Modern Age, cilt. 48, no. 1, pp. 28-36.
SOYSAL NUHOĞLU, Yasemin (2002), “Locating Europe”, European Societies, cilt. 4, no. 3, ss. 265-284.
STRATH, Bo (2000), Europe and the Other, and Europe As the Other, Belçika: P.I.E.-P Lang.
TRENZ, Hans-Jörg (2004), “‟Quo Vadis Europe?‟: Quality newspapers struggling for European unity.” Workshop: One EU – Many Publics?, Birleşik Krallık: Stirling.
VAN DE STEEG, M., RAUER, V., RIVET, S., RISSE, T., (2003), “The EU as a Political Community: A Media Analysis of the „Haider Debate‟ in the EU.” Annual Meeting of the EUSA, ABD: Nashville.
VERDIER, D. ve BRIEN, R., (2001), “Europeanization and Globalization. Politics against Markets in the European Union”, Comparative Political Studies, cilt. 34, no. 3, pp. 227-262.
VURAL, H. S. (2005), Avrupa’da Radikal Sağın Yükselişi, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
YURDUSEV, A. Nuri (2003), International Relations and the Philosphy of History: A Civilizational Approach, Birleşik Krallık: Palgrave Macmillan.