Two kinds of small? The ‘EU core’ in Slovak and Czech geopolitical imagination

ABSTRACT

The article critically examines Czech and Slovak discourses on the so-called ‘core‘ of the European Union. It argues that despite their similarities as small Central European states, Slovakia and the Czech Republic exhibit significant differences in how the geopolitical imagination of their political establishments re-presents the countries‘ position in the center-periphery relations. The article does a two-step analysis. First, it discusses the cultural roots of the contemporary geopolitical imaginaries, tracing them back to formative periods of national history. Then, it analyzes present day establishment discourses on the ‘EU core‘, concluding that the Czech foreign policy debate demonstrates a much stronger tendency towards deliberate self-marginalization and is characterized by competing securitization discourses, one of which warns of the danger of marginalization outside of the ‘core‘ while the other attempts to securitize European and German ‘hegemony‘. The Slovak discourse, on the other hand, is characterized by an underlying constitutive fear of the Self, related to past experiences of anti-Western authoritarianism. This stimulates a much more Euroenthusiast Slovak attitude towards the ‘core‘. The article contributes to the social constructivist debate by arguing that small states can display different attitudes towards European integration based on their identities and historical experiences.

KEYWORDS:

• Central Europe
• Czech Republic
• European Union
• marginality
• Slovakia

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Veronika Víchová, Vojtěch Bahenský, Oľga Gyárfášova and Pavol Hardoš for their help in researching this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Thus, in their 2017 election program, the Euroenthusiast Top09 (formerly led by the famous Karel Schwarzenberg, 7/200 seats in the Chamber of Deputies) promised to block attempts to organize ‘absurd referenda’ on leaving the EU.

2. Fico’s renowned talent for situational ideological mimicry was vividly described by the Slovak politician Miroslav Beblavý as having been ‘Catholic as a child, Communist as an adult, Eurooptimist as of today, and God-knows-what tomorrow‘ (Café Europa 2017). His political skill allowed him to absorb Mečiar’s paternalistic electorate (while also developing his SMER-SD into a pro-European party).

3. For the Czech Republic data was similar as regards the ‘in between’ option (41% and 55%), however more Czechs believed that their country belonged to the ‘West’ (33% and 38% as compared to 21% and 21% in Slovakia for the respective years). In 2017, only 3% of the Czechs agreed that their country belonged to the ‘East’ as compared to 13% in Slovakia.

4. This is not to imply that Slovakia lacks different kinds of ‘Others’. Being contextual, identities typically revolve around multiple otherings. In Slovakia, Hungary and Hungarians would be a crucial non-temporal other, but also Russia, and arguably Germany (albeit rather differently if compared to the Czech case). This study is not a comprehensive catalog of otherings, rather it compares two specific Slovak and Czech discourses, and argues that the Czech discourse lacks a similar temporal Other, which has important implications for how geopolitical space is socially constructed.