GRANICA I POGRANICZE UNII EUROPEJSKIEJ I ROSJI. W POSZUKIWANIU NOWYCH SCHEMATÓW INTERPRETACYJNYCH

• Authors: Jarosław Jańczak

Title variants

EN

BORDER AND BORDERLAND OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND RUSSIA. IN SEARCH FOR NEW INTERPRETIVE SCHEMES

• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

PL

Kryzys w relacjach Unii Europejskiej z Rosji w roku 2014 ujawnił koniec dotychczasowego modelu organizacji relacji granicznych między projektem europejskim i projektem rosyjskim. W efekcie konieczne jest stworzenie nowych schematów interpretacyjnych dla zrozumienia obecnej sytuacji politycznej. Prezentowana analiza proponuje powrót do klasycznego instrumentarium studiów granicznych i aplikacji rozumienia granicy jako frontier i boundary oraz spojrzenie na problem poprzez modele geopolityczne oraz geostrategie. Odejoecie od EU centrycznego podejścia umożliwia stworzenie nowego schematu interpretacyjnego strukturyzacji granicy i pogranicza dwóch konkurencyjnych projektów integracyjnych.

EN

Presented paper aims at proposing a new approach to understanding the current border relations between the European Union and Russia, by claiming, that changing political, economic and social circumstances has undermined the already dominating paradigms in studying borders. The new relations are based on competition, confrontation and even conflict, instead of collaboration. Consequently considerations presented propose to (re)employ classical instruments to studying borders: concepts of frontier and boundary as well as the geostrategies and geopolitics of the EU. At the same time the non-EU-centric perspective, and including an alternative integration project behind the eastern border of the Union, allow to understand the nature of the observable border interactions.

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Przegląd Strategiczny
• Year: 2015
• Issue: 8
• Pages: 19-32

Dates

published

2015-02-01

Contributors

author

Jarosław Jańczak

References

• Agnew J. A. (2003), A World That Knows No Boundaries? The Geopolitics of Globalization and the Myth of a Borderless World, „CIBRWorking Papers in Border Studies”, No. 2.
• Alkan N. (2002), Borders in Europe, w: Borders of Europe, (ed.) N. Alkan, Bonn.
• Benedek M. (2003), From Neighbour to Member of Associate? The Future of the European Union’s Neighbourhood Policy, „EU Policy Network”.
• Berg E., Ehin P. (2006), What Kind of Border Regime is in the Making? Towards a Differentiated and Uneven Border Strategy, „Cooperation and Conflict”, Vol. 41, No. 1.
• Bernatowicz E. (2005), The Barcelona Process as an Instrument of EU Mediterranean Policy, „Polish Quarterly of International Affairs”, No. 4.
• Blockmans S., Hrant K., Vorobiov I. (2012), Towards a Eurasian Economic Union: The Challenge of Integration and Unity, „Centre for European Policy Studies Special Report”, No. 75.
• Browning C. S., Joenniemi P. (2008), Geostrategies of the European Neighbourhood Policy, „European Journal of International Relations”, Vol. 14, No. 3.
• Caporaso J. A. (1996), The European Union and Forms of State: Westphalian, Regulatory or Post-Modern?, „Journal of Common Market Studies”, Vol. 34.
• Cinciara A. (2008), ’Eastern Partnership’ – opening a new chapter of Polish Eastern policy and the European Neighbourhood Policy, „Analyses and Opinions of the Institute of Public Affarirs”, No. 4.
• Comelli M., Greco E., Tocci N. (2007), From Boundary to Borderland: Transforming the Meaning of Borders through the European Neighbourhood Policy, „European Foreign Affairs Review”, No. 12.
• Delcour L., Wolczuk K. (2013), Beyond the Vilnius Summit: Challenges for Deeper EU Integration with Eastern Europe, „European Policy Centre Policy Brief”, 31 October.
• Duke S. (2004), The Enlarged EU and the CFSP, „Reports and Analyses of Center for International Relations”, No. 5.
• Evans G., Newnham J. (1998), The Penguin Dictionary of International Relations, London.
• Germond B. (2010), From Frontier to Boundary and Back Again: The European Union’s Maritime Margins’, „European Foreign Affairs Review”, Vol. 15.
• Jańczak J. (2010), Unia Europejska i jej granice. W poszukiwaniu modelu integracji na europejskich peryferiach, „Przegl¹d Politologiczny”, nr 4.
• Jańczak J. (2013), Przesuniêcie koncepcyjne w „studiach granicznych”, „Przegl¹d Politologiczny”, nr 2.
• Jones S. B., (1959), Boundary Concepts in the Setting of Place and Time, „Annals of the Association of American Geographers”, Vol. 49, Issue 3.
• Klatt M., Hayo H. (2011), Half Empty of Half Full? Over 30 years of Regional Cross-Border Cooperation within the EU: Experiences at the Dutch-German and Danish-German Border, „Journal of Borderland Studies”, Vol. 26, Issue 1.
• Kolstø P. (1993), The New Russian Diaspora: Minority Protection in the Soviet Successor States, „Journal of Peace Research”, Vol. 30, No. 2.
• Kowal P. (ed.) (2002), The EU’s „Eastern Dimension” – An Opportunity or Idée Fixe of Poland’s Policy?,Centrum Stosunków Miêdzynarodowych, Warszawa.
• Kristof L. K. D. (1959), The Nature of Frontiers and Boundaries, „Annals of the Association of American Geographers”, No. 3, Vol. 49.
• Krotov I. (2011), Customs Union between the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Community, „World Customs Journal”, Vol. 5, No. 2.
• Lindberg L. N. (1963), The Political Dynamics of European Economic Integration, Stanford, CA.
• Milczarek D. (2006), Eastern Dimension of the European Union’s Foreign Policy, „Yearbook of Polish European Studies”, No. 10.
• Newman D. (2003), On borders and power: A Theoretical Framework, „Journal of Borderland Studies”, Vol. 18, No. 1.
• O’Dowd L.,Wilson T. (2002), Frontiers of sovereignty in the new Europe, w: Borders of Europe, (ed.) N. Alkan, Bonn.
• Ojanen H. (1999), How to Customise Your Union. Finland and the Northern Dimension of the EU, „Northern Dimensions Yearbook”, Helsinki.
• Scott J. (2013), Mapping Conceptual Change in Thinking European Borders, Call for Papers, Conference Bergamo, Italy, 3–5.07.2013.
• Sekerev A. (2013), The EU Eastern Partners: Post-Vilnius domestic and foreign policy challenges, The Post-Vilnius Challenges of the Eastern Partnership, „The Eastern Partnership Review”, No. 15.
• Süel A. (2008), From the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership to the Union for the Mediterranean, „Perceptions”, Winter.
• Szymczyñski T. R. (2002), Modelowe za³o¿enia zasady elastycznooeci oraz próba kategoryzacji, w: Unia Europejska po Traktacie Nicejskim, (ed.) Z. Czachór, Warszawa.
• Tolksdorf D. (2013), Die Östliche Partnerschaft nach dem Vilnius-Gipfel Ende November 2013. Zunehmende Konfrontation zwischen der Europäischen Union und Russland?, „Südosteuropa Mitteilungen”, No. 6.
• WaltersW. (2004), The Frontiers of the European Union: A Geostrategic Perspective, „Geopolitics”, Vol. 9, No. 3.
• Wind M. (2003), The European Union as a polycentric polity: returning to a neo- medieval Europe?, w: European Constitutionalism beyond the State, (eds.) J. H. H.Weiler,M.Wind, Cambridge.
• Youngs R., Pishchikova K. (2013), Smart Geostrategy for the Eastern Partnership, Brussels.
• Zielonka J. (2007), Europe as Empire. The Nature of the Enlarged European Union, Oxford.

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/ps.2015.1.2