D'une « mémoire » européenne à l'européanisation de la « mémoire »

EU research policy as a transnational memory policy instrument? The framework programmes and the production of competing visions of Europe

“…While European integration is often presented as a remedy to the Holocaust and its atrocities, Rousso (2007) noted that the intention of the EU founders was rather 'to eradicate the economic and political causes of the two world wars' (p. 33). Furthermore, while the EU institutions try in this frame to enforce a unified European memory, in particular of the Holocaust (Droit, 2007;Gensburger, 2008), Jarausch and Lindenberger (2007) argued that 'Eastern and Western Europeans still are [far] from establishing a "common memory culture"' (p. 3).…”

“…It aimed at identifying factors influencing young Europeans' civic and political engagement (or lack thereof), particularly by examining how this 'is shaped by the shadows (past, present and future) of totalitarianism and populism in Europe', and it offered solutions to 'help young people form sophisticated understandings of the implications of historical events and processes' (project's presentation and final report summary). Furthermore, by claiming to overcome the 'reified classification' between post-communist and liberal democratic heritages, it matched the EU memory policy, which promotes a reconciled or even united memory since the 1990s (Droit, 2007;Gensburger, 2008;Mink and Neumayer, 2007), and which has clearly been incorporated in the FP's call, since the topic on totalitarianism primarily aimed at 'Overcoming the heritage of the "divided continent"'.…”

“…Secondly, the FPs have increasingly considered negative historical experiences concerning Western and Eastern Europe since 2008 -following a similar shift within other EU and Council of Europe actions (Droit, 2007;Garcia, 2009;Gensburger, 2008) as well as a broader global development concerning the Holocaust remembrance (Levy and Sznaider, 2001). Furthermore, the Western European narrative was based on the uniqueness of Holocaust until the second half of the 2000s.…”

“…Particularly informative sources in that respect are the texts of the calls, which were initially brief, but have become more elaborate over the successive FPs, as well as the presentations and reports on selected projects, all available on the website of the Community Research and Development Information Service (CORDIS). 1 While many authors have not only examined the role of the EU institutions, but also of EU Member States, the Council of Europe, journalists, museums, religious actors or historians in shaping visions of the European past (especially Calligaro, 2013Calligaro, , 2014Gensburger, 2008;Gensburger and Lavabre, 2012;Mazé, 2014;Mink and Neumayer, 2007;Pakier and Stråth, 2010), studying the FPs can particularly improve our understanding of the interactions between the European Commission and scholars, especially historians. This article does not claim to analyse all aspects of this question.…”

(Un)shared memory: European Parliament and EU Remembrance Day for Victims of Terrorism

“…EU memory politics is reflective of jointly forged political stances on the past, showing that European histories and hence experiences are entangled. As such, a shared memorythe lowest common denominator of those (different) pastsis identified as a key to forging a sense of belonging to a united Europe, able to underpin its legitimacy and identity-building efforts (Gensburger and Lavabre, 2012;Calligaro and Foret, 2012). While such cosmopolitan approaches to EU memory prescribe ethical and moral templates in confronting the matters of the past (Levy and Sznaider, 2002), the EUa transnational mnemonic arenamore often serves as a political opportunity structure.…”