ANDREAS RASPOTNIK The European Union and its Northern Frontier EUropean Geopolitics and ...

377 Pages·2016·16.83 MB·English

ANDREAS RASPOTNIK

The European Union and its Northern Frontier
EUropean Geopolitics and its Arctic Context

The European Union and its Northern Frontier:
EUropean Geopolitics and its Arctic Context

Inauguraldissertation
zur
Erlangung des Doktorgrades
der
Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Fakultät
der
Universität zu Köln

2016

vorgelegt von

Mag. Andreas Raspotnik, LL.M.

aus
Finkenstein, Österreich
Referent: Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Wessels (University of Cologne)
Korreferent: Prof. Dr. Lassi Heininen (University of Lapland, Rovaniemi)
Tag der Promotion: 12 Oktober 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE ...................................................................................................... III
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... VI
ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................ VII
LIST of FIGURES .......................................................................................... IX
LIST of TABLES ............................................................................................. X
LIST of TEXT BOXES .................................................................................... X

PART ONE SETTING UP THE STUDY .......................................................... 1
1. Introduction: The Geopolitics of an Arctic Meltdown ......................... 3
1.1. The Academic Endeavour and the Dissertation’s Objectives ................ 6
1.2. The Dissertation’s Line of Action: The Research Question and a Step-
by-Step Approach ...................................................................................... 9
1.3. Value and Limitations: A Scientific Justification .................................. 16
1.4. The Roadmap: Geopolitics, the Arctic and the European Union ......... 23

PART TWO UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT ........................................ 27
2. The Thought Experiment Referred to as Geopolitics: A Classic, a
Critical and a EUropean Approach ............................................................ 29
2.1. A Short Journey through Time: From Classic… ................................... 31
2.2. … to Critical Geopolitics: A Concept through Ages ............................. 40
2.3. EUropean Geopolitics or the Making-of a Geopolitical Subject .......... 45
2.4. The Remains of Geopolitics: A Summary .............................................. 55
3. A Longer Note on Methodology .......................................................... 59
3.1. Discourse Analysis and Critical Geopolitics ......................................... 60
3.1.1. Texts as Key… .................................................................................... 62
3.1.2. … and the Element of Spatial Argumentation ..................................... 70
3.2. Organisations from a Critical Geopolitical Perspective ....................... 72
3.2.1. Looking at the Inside of an Organisation ............................................. 73
3.3. Interviews and Data Collection ............................................................... 77

PART THREE UNDERSTANDING THE ARCTIC CONTEXT ...................... 79
4. Arctic Geopolitics and the Zeitgeist of the 21st Century ................... 81
4.1. A Region under Close ‘Spatial’ Scrutiny ................................................ 83
4.2. The History and Identity of a ‘Geopolitical’ Arctic ................................ 90
4.3. Arctic Rights: Black or White Hole? ..................................................... 100
4.3.1. Law and Governance in the Arctic: The Legal Situation .................... 101
4.3.2. Law and Governance in the Arctic: The Institutional Approach ......... 112
4.3.3. The Arctic Rights Round-Up .............................................................. 119
4.4. Arctic Interests: The Last Frontier? ...................................................... 123
4.4.1. A Flag beneath an Ocean of Melting Ice ........................................... 124
4.4.2. Arctic Resources: An ‘Oil Dorado’? ................................................... 132
4.4.3. Arctic Maritime Transportation: Putting Ships in Place? .................... 141
4.4.4. Arctic Fisheries: An Abundance of Riches? ...................................... 147
I
4.4.5. And as for the Future? ....................................................................... 152
4.5. Arctic Responsibilities: Adapting to a Changing Arctic ..................... 154
4.6. The Geopolitical Arctic of the 21st Century: The Bottom Line is that…
................................................................................................................. 157

PART FOUR UNDERSTANDING THE CONTENT .................................... 161
5. EUropean Dimensions of Arctic Presence ...................................... 163
5.1. Territorial Component and Legal Competences ................................. 164
5.2. Economic Interests and Demands ........................................................ 176
5.3. Environmental Footprint and Polar Research ..................................... 182
5.4. Regional and Cohesion Policy .............................................................. 184
5.5. Four Broad Dimensions, one Brief Conclusion .................................. 188
6. An Action in the Making: The EU’s 21st Century Arctic Policy-
Making Process ........................................................................................ 191
6.1. From the Cold War Era to 2007/2008… ................................................ 192
6.2. … And from 2008 Onwards ................................................................... 198
6.2.1. Climate Change and International Security (High Representative &
European Commission, 2008) ........................................................... 199
6.2.2. Arctic Governance (European Parliament, 2008) .............................. 201
6.2.3. The European Union and the Arctic Region (European Commission,
2008) ................................................................................................. 204
6.2.4. Conclusions on Arctic Issues (Council of the European Union, 2009)
.......................................................................................................... 211
6.2.5. Resolution on a Sustainable EU Policy for the High North (European
Parliament, 2011) .............................................................................. 213
6.2.6. Developing a European Union Policy towards the Arctic Region
(European Commission & High Representative, 2012) ..................... 216
6.2.7. EU Strategy for the Arctic (European Parliament, 2014) ................... 220
6.2.8. Developing a European Union Policy towards the Arctic (Council of the
European Union, 2014) ..................................................................... 222
6.3. In a ‘Policy-Making’ Nutshell ................................................................. 227
7. The EU’s Arctic Space-Making Practices ........................................ 233
7.1. Geopolitical Ideas and the Union’s Moral (Arctic) Language ............ 234
7.2. The Production of the EU’s Arctic Storyline ........................................ 244
7.3. ‘Arctic Governance’ at a Distance ........................................................ 262
7.4. ‘Frozen’ Technologies of Geopolitical Ordering ................................. 269
7.5. A EUropean Geopolitical Subject in the Arctic? ................................. 273

PART FIVE AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS? ................................................ 281
8. The Conclusion: The Triangle of Concept, Context and Content . 283
8.1. Research Results and Contribution ..................................................... 284
8.2. Future Research ..................................................................................... 296
REFERENCES ........................................................................................... 298
APPENDIX ................................................................................................. 352

II
PREFACE
Working on a dissertation seems like an endless process. It is a Sisyphean task that
drives one to experience pure desperation creating thereby a steady state of self-
consciousness and unrest – it simply and continuously but ever so effectively preys
on one’s mind. Moreover, this process bears many obstacles, either of individual,
administrative, financial or academic nature.
In March 2015, the English rock band Muse released their song Dead Inside.
Its lyrics, and particularly a short segment thereof, perfectly encapsulates the ‘normal
state of mind’ and close relationship I have developed with the present study over the
years – I gave you everything, I can’t give you anymore. Looking back at this long
process of almost five years, I realise that I am indebted to so many sources of
inspiration as well as diversified, indispensable support.

First of all, I am most grateful to four friends that have read and commented on
substantial parts of my dissertation and whose humour, traits of character, expertise
and personality helped me to survive this piece of lunacy unscathed: Wulf Reiners,
Adam Stępień, Stefan Steinicke and Andreas Østhagen. I owe you guys.

The present study would also not be the same without the helpful discussions
and/or feedback by Alyson Bailes, Klaus Dodds, Erik van Doorn, Nadezhda
Filimonova, Piotr Gracyzk, Sebastian Knecht, Merje Kuus, Nengye Liu, Ingrid
Medby, Martin Müller, Erik Molenaar and Scott Stephenson. Moreover, I would like
to thank my two supervisors Wolfgang Wessels and Pontus Odmalm, who provided
me the opportunity to obtain my doctorate and gave me the necessary scientific
freedom to write the dissertation my way.

Aside from these people a wide range of friends and colleagues has joined me
on this five-year long voyage. People I have either met in one of the many places I
lived and worked in, or folks that have just always been part of my life.
My time in Cologne and Edinburgh, 2011-2013, was essentially shaped by the
entire community of the The Marie Curie Initial Training Network EXACT, notably
Aline Bartenstein, Marlene Gottwald, Leonhard den Hertog, Miguel Haubrich Seco
III
and James Nyomakwa-Obimpeh. Yet, Cologne was so much more than only
EXACT. The hometown of the fabulous 1. FC Köln is also the home of the Jean
Monnet Chair of Prof. Wessels and all the people that worked there, in particular
Nicole Ahler, Fulden Eskidelvan, Cyril Gläser, Andreas Hofmann, Claudia Hefftler,
Oliver Höing, Tobias Kunstein, Alice Oeter, Katrin Schmermund, Mirja Schröder
and Funda Tekin – colleagues that became friends. Eventually, Cologne would not
have been the same without Leonie Völker and her outstandingly great personality.
Moreover, I am grateful to have met my Norwegian language-fellow, Tobias Gockel,
and I remain deeply indebted to my relatives in Cologne and Solingen – the
Middeldorf-Radtke-Sidorczuk combo. Yet, EXACT has also brought me back to
Brussels, giving me the chance to meet Laura Boone, Marine Jacob, Mirte van den
Berge and Laura Ventura.

From 2014 onwards, I had the good fortune to live, research and write in Oslo
and Berkeley, respectively. Being twice a Guest Researcher at the Fridtjof Nansen
Institute (FNI) in Oslo, funded by the E.ON Stipendienfonds, enabled me to surround
myself with scholars interested in Arctic matters. Hence, I would therefore like to
thank the entire FNI-crew for the fruitful and quiz-challenging time at Polhøgda,
most notably Jan Dalsgaard Sørensen, Geir Hønneland, Tor Håkon Jackson
Inderberg, Claes Lykke Ragner, Kabir Taneja and my ‘running-mate’ Svein
Vigeland Rottem. Moreover, Oslo was and will always remain precious to me
because it is the place of as beloved people as Kata Kvaran, Alice Bothwell, Armin
Fleischer, Michaela Frank, Despina Gleitsmann, Betteke van Noort, Admiral Rune
Stavnes, Paul Troost and Blake Wergeland.
And yet, it was my residence in the Bay Area that made a lasting impression on
me. This beautiful and mind-blowing, however, ambiguous region of old and new,
poor and rich, swept me off my feet in so many ways. Hence, I am deeply thankful to
the Berkeley-Cologne Fund, which sponsored my research stay as Visiting
Researcher at the Institute of European Studies (IES) at the University of California,
Berkeley and the respective people in charge: Brit Sperber, Jeroen Dewulf and Gia
White. Eventually, it was the group of people that surrounded me in Berkeley that
made these six months memorable ones: Ritu Argawal, Magdalena Cadena, Joel
IV
Coito, Aikaterini Florou, Raphaël Gellert, Derek Brother O’Leary, Ratko
Marinkovic, and above all Eleana Vaja. And of course Alex Lorton, who, candidly,
fascinated me from the very first moment I saw her.
I further wish to thank my ‘Arctic family’, my colleagues and friends – old and
new – from The Arctic Institute, particularly Tom Fries, Victoria Herrmann, Malte
Humpert, Marc Jacobsen, Kathrin Keil and (again) Andreas Østhagen. We have
already achieved so much and come so far that we will definitely not stop here and
now. Moreover, my ‘Arctic family’ further includes Tsar Igor Shevchuk and Gosia
Smieszek. Thanks for everything guys.

Last but definitely not least, my deep and honest gratitude goes to all my
friends as well as my family back home in Austria and all over Europe. In particular,
to Manuel Bergmann and Alexander Planasch, who regardless of my physical
location proved to be true friends throughout the entire time; to Christoph Posautz; to
Philip Salzmann and Iris Stöckl; to the ‘Hawaiian’ and one and only Stefanie
Suppick; to Adam Madsen and Claudia Wittwer; to the German/Swiss crew around
Ursina Ammann, Bastian Gruhne and Sebastian Knab; to Gerhard Schaunig and
Michael Siter; to Thomas Künster, Roman Lesjak, Roland Ressmann and Andreas
Witschnigg. And chiefly to Katrin Binder, who fortunately re-entered my life,
supported my last academic steps by simply being herself and being there for me,
truly rocking my world ever since then. And I would also like to thank Arnulf Lagler
and his indispensable financial support during my (long) life as a student.

To my mum Sigrid Raspotnik, without whom all this would not have been
possible in the first place. To the best brother there is: Thomas Raspotnik. To my dad
Arnold Raspotnik, the intellectually stimulating and left-wing discussions we
continue to have, and his wife Eva Maria Happe. To my step-sister Raphaela and her
family.
Finally, a concluding thanks goes to myself. For eventually not going insane
and for finishing this seemingly never-ending process. For being – in the words of
College & Electric Youth – a real human being, and a real hero, back against the
wall and odds, with the strength of a will and a cause.
V
ABSTRACT
The present study explores EUropean geopolitical agency in a distinct spatio-
temporal context: the Arctic region of the early 21st century. Thus, it provides an in-
depth analysis of the European Union’s process to construct EUropean legitimacy
and credibility in its ‘Northern Neighbourhood’ between 2008 and 2014.
Embedded in a conceptual and methodological framework using critical
geopolitics, this study assesses the strategic policy reasoning of the EU and the
implicit geopolitical discourses that guide and determine a particular line of
argumentation so as to claim a ‘legitimate’ role in the Arctic and accordingly
construct a distinct ‘EUropean Arctic space’. In doing so, it establishes a clearer
picture on the (narrated) regional interests of the EU and the related developed policy
and concrete steps taken in order to get hold of these interests. Eventually, the
analysis gets to the conceptual bottom of what exactly fashioned the EU with
geopolitical agency in the circumpolar North.
As a complementary explanation, this study provides a thick description of the
area under scrutiny – the Arctic region – in order to explicate the systemic context
that conditioned the EU’s regional demeanour and action. Elucidated along the lines
of Arctic history and identity, rights, interests and responsibility, it delineates the
emergence of the Arctic as a region of and for geopolitics.
The findings indicate that the sui generis character of the Arctic as EUropean
neighbourhood essentially determined the EU’s regional performance. It explicates
that the Union’s ‘traditional’ geopolitical models of civilian or normative power got
entangled in a fluid state of Arctic affairs: a distinct regional system, characterised by
few strong state actors with pronounced national Arctic interests and identities, and
an indefinite local context of environmental changes, economic uncertainties and
social challenges.
This study applies critical geopolitics in a Political Science context and
essentially contributes to a broader understanding of EU foreign policy construction
and behaviour. Ultimately, it offers an interdisciplinary approach on how to analyse
EU external action by explicitly taking into account the internal and external social
processes that ultimately condition a certain EUropean foreign policy performance.

VI