The external constitution of European identity: Russia and Turkey as Europe-makers

Abstract

The view of identities as always situated in a relationship with the Other underlies contemporary constructivist social theory. Taking a step further, and combining constructivist approaches to identity with insights from post-colonial studies, this article argues that the Other, far from being a mere presence, often plays an active role in identity politics. By tracing the historically varying ways in which Turkey and Russia have engaged in European identity construction, it demonstrates that this is an interactive process of negotiation between the European Self and its external Others in which agency of the Other is revealed. In particular, Russia and Turkey exercise agency by challenging, each in its own manner, the EU’s power to define the normative meaning of Europe. While Turkey has contributed to a decentring of European identity by challenging the self-perception of Europe as a multicultural space, Russia’s uncompromising stance tends to consolidate the EU-centred image of Europe as a political community based on liberal democratic values.

Russia's Postcolonial Identity

“…Thus, there must be something else that contributed to the stabilisation of Russia's position as Europe's Other, making it a persistent and in many respects a defining feature of national identity. Existing literature, for the most part, confines itself to establishing the presence of this obstinate ambiguity and drawing parallels with other similar cases, such as Turkey, Japan, Iran or China (Zarakol 2011, Morozov and Rumelili 2012, Nau and Ollapally 2012.…”

“…This is certainly true for the Russia-Europe bond: while both identities are liminal within each other's discursive space, this is exactly what makes them so important for each other (cf. Morozov and Rumelili 2012).…”

Socio-environmental cooperation and conflict? A discursive understanding and its application to the case of Israel and Palestine

“…], the goals that are shared by the members of a group" and relational comparisons with other identity groups (Abdelal et al, 2006, p. 696). In short, collective identities define how the respective groups understand themselves in relation to others and how they define their interests (Buckley-Zistel, 2006;Morozov and Rumelili, 2012). Thus, collective identities are integral to the onset and reproduction of conflict (Fröhlich, 2010, 38-40;Jabri, 1996, p. 5).…”

The EU Foreign Policy Analysis

“…Each time the Union has seemed to be flexing its muscles and envisaged sending CSDP missions in the Eastern Neighbourhood, Russia has overtly expressed its criticism (Biscop, 2010;Delcour, 2010;Haukkala, 2010). Consequently, Russia uneasily accepts the Union's sui generis identity as long as it gives it a free hand to exert its hard power (Morozov and Rumelili, 2012).…”