Practicing Geographical Uniqueness: The Geopolitics of Prenegotiation and Icelandic Accession to the European Union

Trans Inst British Geog

2016

Self Cite

Foucault and Lefebvre's writings have rekindled interest among geographers in territory-state relations, with recent work conceptualising territory as a state strategy to control space, and on the state as a socio-natural relation. However, what is lacking is how these debates intersect with post-human understandings of nature's materialities, and how the resulting 'material territory' mediates state periodisation. Drawing on a case study of Iceland, we address this issue to show how pre-modern territorialisation shaped state territorialities, and how state periodisation arises from political order imbricating with the materialities of territory. The originality of the work is threefold. First is to show how territory as a material category resists or reinterprets political ordering through longitudinal examination of a single case. Second is to reconceptualise state periodisation as an evolutionary material-political, as much as socio-economic, process. Third is to establish empirically the unacknowledged tensions between the state's use of territory to order 'domestic' and 'foreign' affairs. We analyse the implications of a material conception of territory for state periodisation and for wider understandings of contemporary statecraft. The state is revealed as a site of multiple territorialities in space, and territorial multiplicities over time.

show abstract

Section: Volumetric Orderings and Iceland In The Modern Geopolitical mentioning

confidence: 78%

(Dis‐)ordering the state: territory in Icelandic statecraft

Trans Inst British Geog

2016

Self Cite

show abstract

“…Compensatory diplomatic strategies involve limiting the negative effects of uniqueness arguments to European integration dynamics, seeing Icelandic membership of the EU as a positive inducement for EU member states, not least through the playing of the Arctic card and Iceland's centrality to an EU envisioning of the high latitudes, and re‐emphasising Iceland's historical engagement and connections with Europe and also its shared Nordic identity (Moisio et al . ; Jones & Clark ). Missionary diplomatic strategies are much more uncompromising in nature, with uniqueness presented diplomatically as a national geographical emblem, a lynchpin of Icelandic identity to be protected from ‘EUrope’.…”

Section: Icelandic Uniqueness and Geopolitical Positioning Towards ‘Ementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lastly, ‘geopolitical imaginaries (codes and visions) for geopolitical repositioning’ imbricate these three constituents – that is, guide and/or ‘map on’ to uses of territory/territoriality for geopolitical effect (for example, claims to ‘geographical uniqueness’), embedded notions of state self‐identity (e.g. states acting as a cultural ‘bridge’, or a bastion of particular ‘values’), and particular forms of diplomatic action – by being mobilised as part of a purposive geopolitical strategy (Dijkink ; Grygiel ; Clark & Jones ; Jones & Clark ). Rationales for (re)positioning by states might include to deepen or to distance affiliations with other states; to address perceived issues of ‘difference’ or hierarchy; to promote ‘influence’ or ‘status’ with other countries; and/or to ensure membership of particular state collectivities, such as regional trade blocs or global governance structures.…”

Section: Contemporary Geopolitical (Re)positioning Strategies Of Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Geographical uniqueness has been widely used as a discursive formulation by state elites in their international relations (Jones & Clark ). Clearly, politicians and diplomats of many states have deployed geographical exceptionalism of one sort or another to support specific geopolitical visions and identities.…”

Section: Icelandic Uniqueness and Geopolitical Positioning Towards ‘Ementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This process of (re)positioning is inescapably contested and fraught with numerous political challenges, with diplomats expending considerable energies trying to make geopolitical representations visible, workable and profitable in their struggle to co‐ordinate geopolitics both at home and at‐a‐distance. Building upon work on European enlargement (Moisio ; Busch & Krzyzanowski ; Browning & Christou ; Bialasiewicz ), here our empirical focus is on Iceland, one of the first casualties of the international financial crisis and subsequent candidate country for EU membership (Thorhallsson ; Loftsdottir ; Clark & Jones ; Nielsson & Torfason ; Wade & Sigurgeirsdottir 2012; Jones & Clark ; Bergmann ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Contemporary Geopolitical Positionings of Iceland Towards ‘Europe’ and the Nordic States

Tijd voor Econ & Soc Geog

2016

Self Cite

In the context of the spatialities of Europeanisation, we demonstrate the manoeuvrability of states through the selection and deployment of geopolitical positioning strategies. Specifically, we highlight how geographic quantities (territory, location, resources, natural conditions) are bundled together to substantiate a mutable national interest as well as underpin the advocacy by states of particular geopolitical positionings. We argue that the diplomatic use of geographic quantities in state-led efforts to structure and shape international interactions has demonstrable geopolitical consequences. Using the case study of Iceland, one of the first casualties of the international financial crisis, we examine this state's geopolitical repositioning towards 'EUrope' through use of geographical uniqueness and concomitant reaffirmation of Nordic closeness. We expose the diplomatic challenges to the use of geographical categories such as uniqueness in geopolitical (re)positioning towards the emerging 'EUropean' order.

show abstract

The great implications of spatialisation: Grounds for closer engagement between political geography and political science?

2013

Geoforum