The Perils of Protracted EU Accession: “Eurofundamentalist” and “Euroopportunistic” Governmental Discourses on the EU in North Macedonia and Serbia
P4-05
Presented by: Kristijan Fidanovski
This paper compares the EU-related governmental discourses among key policymakers in North Macedonia and Serbia since 2017. Despite finding themselves at similar stages of sociopolitical development and EU integration, the two countries exhibit considerable differences in this regard. North Macedonia’s government has provided an unambiguously favourable portrayal of the EU, best summarised as “Eurofundamentalism”, where EU
accession is portrayed as a basic prerequisite for the prosperity of the country. By contrast, Serbia’s government has engaged in a “Euroopportunistic” representation of EU membership as a pragmatic policy goal whose desirability is subject to constant re-evaluation.
Each of the two discourses is examined at three levels: (1) the creation of a symbolic façade of “Europeanness”; (2) the presentation of a timeframe for EU accession; (3) the portrayal of the importance of EU membership. Through its divergent findings between the two countries, The paper challenges the “stabilitocracy” paradigm of understanding the EU integration of the Western Balkans in a rather uniform and top-down fashion and points to the considerable discursive agency of national governments. It also posits that the two disparate governmental discourses might paradoxically produce a similar effect of undermining public knowledge about – and support for – the EU in both countries.
accession is portrayed as a basic prerequisite for the prosperity of the country. By contrast, Serbia’s government has engaged in a “Euroopportunistic” representation of EU membership as a pragmatic policy goal whose desirability is subject to constant re-evaluation.
Each of the two discourses is examined at three levels: (1) the creation of a symbolic façade of “Europeanness”; (2) the presentation of a timeframe for EU accession; (3) the portrayal of the importance of EU membership. Through its divergent findings between the two countries, The paper challenges the “stabilitocracy” paradigm of understanding the EU integration of the Western Balkans in a rather uniform and top-down fashion and points to the considerable discursive agency of national governments. It also posits that the two disparate governmental discourses might paradoxically produce a similar effect of undermining public knowledge about – and support for – the EU in both countries.