The relationship between Greenland and the EU can best be understood by exploring the development from Danish colonialism to a future independent Greenlandic state. In 1985, Greenland became the first territory ever to leave the EEC when it opted for status as an 'overseas country or territory'. The manner in which Greenland had to follow Denmark into the EEC in 1973 -whereby Greenlanders saw control over their fisheries move from distant Copenhagen to evenmore-distant Brussels -was pivotal for the Greenlandic demands for home rule which succeeded in 1979 and made the 1985 withdrawal possible. On 25 November 2008, a majority of the people of Greenland voted in favour of enhanced home rule -'self-government' -still within formal Danish sovereignty. Denmark and Greenland alike are preparing for a future envisioned as involving climate change, intensive raw material extraction, new transportation corridors and new claims to sovereignty over the Arctic. Greenland uses this imagined future as a way of enhancing its subjectivity, not the least when dealing with the EU. This article analyses how the Greenlandic selfunderstanding as being on the way to sovereignty -and the tensions involved -structure the triangular relationship between the EU, Greenland and Denmark. The article concludes that the visions of sovereign equality might, on the one hand, create greater expectations than Greenland will immediately be able to live up to -at home and in the EU. On the other hand, the representation of the Greenland-EU relationship as one of sovereign equality -present and futuremight just be able to provoke the resources necessary to make the dream come true.

Benevolence, homogeneity and peace has never been the full story of the Nordic region. Building on a critical review of myths of 'Norden' in international relations theory and beyond (international political economy, security studies, regional and European integration theory and postcolonialism), we develop the framework of postimperial sovereignty games for understanding contemporary Nordic foreign policy and regional dynamics. We shift focus from the 'large' Nordic countries to the remnants of Nordic empires: Iceland, Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Åland. On the one hand, these polities struggle to enhance their independence -Iceland even after becoming a sovereign state; the other polities via self-government arrangements. On the other hand, the former colonies develop close relationships to a supranational European Union in their effort to achieve independent subjectivity. Contrasting the developments towards increased independence and European integration, the article demonstrates the importance of imperial legacies. Firstly, it challenges Norden as a model security community. Secondly, it questions the image of a harmonious Nordic welfare model based on equality and consensus in light of the experiences of Iceland, Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Åland. Finally, it suggests that no theory of European integration is complete without taking imperial and postimperial processes into account.

The article argues that there are a number of concepts of politics in play in the current debates on securitization theory and that greater awareness regarding these conceptual differences helps clarify not only theoretical differences but also the possibilities for new theoretical development and reflection. The article identifies three conversations on politics: first, a conversation on how politics concerns action and intentionality; second, a conversation on the modern organization of politics, spheres and sectors; and, third, a conversation on the relationship between politics, ethics and science. Where the first and third conversations refer to politics as an act, in the second conversation politics is inherently tied to the institutional or spatial structures of government -the state, the public, the political field, spheres, sectors or function.

No abstract

No abstract