engleski

The Visegrad group - a united front against a common European narrative?

There have always been differing views on what the European Union (EU) should look like and this fact has become even more accentuated in recent years. The Visegrad Group (V4) in particular has emerged and distinctly positioned itself as an actor opposing not just some of the liberal tenets of the EU, but also the advocacy for deeper integration. Building on the momentum of the criticism towards the EU’s approach to the migration crisis, the group has mounted a broader plea for a ‘Europe of differences’ where, to quote the Polish PM Morawiecki, “one size does not fit all”. This development represents a far cry from the initial sentiments of a ‘return to the West’, which were present in V4 member countries after the fall of communism. Moreover, V4’s reorienting can be interpreted as renegotiation of the meaning of the term Central Europe itself as the West has, per Viktor Orban, “lost its attractiveness”. The V4 is not, however, an entirely homogenous group ; each country has its own historical, political, and cultural specificities. The aim of this paper is therefore to answer whether or not V4’s defiance to the EU and the West represents a ‘united front’. Even though migration policy is a point of agreement among member states, there are some broader points where the countries depart from one another. The paper politically contextualizes the positions of each V4 country towards the EU, paying specific attention to the differences in populisms of ruling parties. While it is easy to group the Polish Law and Justice (PiS) party and Hungary’s Fidesz together as examples of right-wing ethnonationalist populist parties, Slovakia’s OL’aNO and Czech ANO do not quite fit the category. The less investigated populisms of the latter two have not yielded marked Euroscepticism, but both of the parties’ salient national level criticisms have at times been extended to European topics as well. Another point of investigation concerns historical narratives. Given that the notion of the ‘return to the West’ was a highly historically-informed narrative, the paper also presents how the ruling elites nowadays utilize history to position their country towards the EU. The two more moderate ruling parties of the V4 and their leaders can be seen as mnemnonic abnegators, while the remaining two fit the description of mnemonic warriors. Finally, the problem is also socially contextualized by comparing the popular demand for Euroscepticism in the V4 states. It is shown that the positions of the citizens differ between countries and that they do not match those of their ruling parties. Comparative numbers on religiosity which challenge the idea of a return of Christianity to the forefront of politics in all member states (namely the Czech Republic) are also presented. In conclusion, Hungary and Poland currently differ from Slovakia and the Czech Republic, with the former two being more critical of the EU and the West.

Visegrad Group, Euroscepticism, populism, historical narratives

nije evidentirano