This thesis analyses the European Union’s approach to conflict resolution in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia and Kosovo. It identifies the nature of the Union’s policies in the three countries, as well as explaining these policy preferences and how they are legitimised. In doing so, it contributes to a debate in the literature on the EU’s role in conflict resolution, between those who suggest that the Union’s influence is oriented towards the transformation of conflict parties’ identities, and those who argue instead that its policies have encouraged the recognition and accommodation of existing identities. The thesis employs a constructivist institutionalist framework with which to understand EU actors’ policy preferences. Applying this through discourse analysis of policy documents and official speeches as well as interviews with key policy-makers, I offer support to the view that the EU’s approach is one of conflict regulation rather than transformation. This approach is underpinned by a paradigm that sees conflicts as driven by a fundamental incompatibility between the interests and identities of different ethnic groups. Such an approach has been legitimised not by reference to norms with a basis in EU law, but rather to practice in specific member states and to the nature of the Union itself, which EU actors view as having brought peace and stability to Europe through the accommodation of national identities.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:583157 |
| Date | January 2013 |
| Creators | Cooley, Laurence Peter |
| Publisher | University of Birmingham |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Source | http://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/4627/ |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds