Wednesday, July 8, 2015
J104 (13 rue de l'Université)
The paper argues against the usual paradigm of ’slippery slope’ explanations of relations between autonomy and secession. It revolves around the question why are some sub-state regions explicitly refuting claims to independent statehood, and under what conditions these strategies change?
The programme sheds light on why political projects across European sub-state regions that are de-ethnicising their membership include or exclude certain territorial strategies and claims (such as external self-determination). In Western Europe, these sub-state projects are often manifested as nationalisms that include ‘total exit options’; as regionalisms that nearly always exclude claims for independent statehood in Southeastern Europe and as various types non-ethnic secessionist projects in the post-Soviet space. It
is a novel approach emphasising the influence that the supra-state integration processes have on framing and activation of sub-state claims. The paper is based on insights from the cases coming from the UK, Spain, Moldova, Ukraine, Croatia and Serbia.
The programme sheds light on why political projects across European sub-state regions that are de-ethnicising their membership include or exclude certain territorial strategies and claims (such as external self-determination). In Western Europe, these sub-state projects are often manifested as nationalisms that include ‘total exit options’; as regionalisms that nearly always exclude claims for independent statehood in Southeastern Europe and as various types non-ethnic secessionist projects in the post-Soviet space. It
is a novel approach emphasising the influence that the supra-state integration processes have on framing and activation of sub-state claims. The paper is based on insights from the cases coming from the UK, Spain, Moldova, Ukraine, Croatia and Serbia.
