Expanded Europe: from the Holy Alliance to the Treaty of Lisbon
Seminar directed by Stella Ghervas, Institut d’Études Avancées – Paris
Date: 2009-2010
Location: IEA-Paris, 16-18 rue Suger, 75006 Paris
Following its recent territorial expansion, the European Union is undergoing a crisis (often considered as an “identity” crisis) caused by profound disagreements about a specific set of core ideas on the Europe-to-be. Yet the authors of European treaties had taken particular care in incorporating universal values into these texts.
What are those controversial ideas? What referents (i.e. aspirations, events, memories or imaginations) did they call up in the minds of the voters who rejected them in the ballots? This seminar proposes to trace those referents back to their origins, while broadening the focus both in time and space: by going beyond the conventional year of 1945 and considering all of expanded Europe.
1st session: “Reassessing 1815, to understand the 27-Country Europe”
Date: Tuesday 30 June 2009, 2:15–6:00 PM
Following its expansion to 27 countries, the European Union is still struggling to define itself. This crisis, often considered an “identity crisis”, has been particularly visible in the controversies that led to the downfall of the European Constitution (2005) and have delayed the adoption of the Treaty of Lisbon (2007). To overcome this difficulty, the authors of these texts had banked on a set of consensual “European values”. Yet this attempt appears to have somewhat missed its target, since debates eventually focused on fundamental differences, or dichotomies, such as national independence vs. a supranational state, social democracy vs. economic liberalism, religion vs. the secular state, etc.
In the face of this new challenge, a new epistemological approach becomes necessary. Could a double shift in our focus, both in time and space, bring new answers?
Concerning space, there is the issue of the recent integration of the peoples from Central and Eastern Europe, particularly with the place of the Greco-Byzantine and Slavic heritages in the shared culture – as well as other cultural and religious traditions.
As for time, 1945 has long been considered the starting point of European construction, at a time where Eastern Europe was being de facto excluded because it belonged to a different and antagonistic bloc. Could we not, on the contrary, make the hypothesis that the period from the end of the Second World War to the fall of the Iron Curtain was, in fact, an interruption in an ongoing process of European convergence, that traces back to prior times when the continent had been considered a single entity – in particular during the Enlightenment, the Congress of Vienna and later, the League of Nations?
To that end, we will follow a trail across all of Europe, starting from 1815. This was a crucial period where this entire space was part of a single “concert of nations”, and when many of the national borders that Europeans still live in today were defined. More to the point, how should we consider the signing of the Holy Alliance – a treaty that promoted for the first time the notion of a single “family” or “nation” encompassing all countries on the continent, including Russia – by virtually all the European states? Should we see there the premises of later treaties, particularly those of the EU?
In order to further explore the validity of that hypothesis, as well as the implications it may have on how we understand the institutional difficulties of the European Union, we will bring together, for this study day, a small group of researchers working on the subject of Europe.
2nd session: “The Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations: effects on today’s Europe”
Date: Thursday 8 October 2009, 1.00-6.00 PM
The treaties that marked the end of the First World War were the starting point for a territorial reorganisation. By abolishing the Central Empires, it laid out a new mental geography for the European continent, now fragmented into a set of nation-states not unlike contemporary Europe.
Meanwhile, the trauma of the conflict, as well as the intent to avoid another European war, gave birth in 1919 to the League of Nations, with the purpose of resolving conflicts between states and maintaining peace. While the idea of such an organisation was not new in European thought (it is found in the 18th century in Kant’s “Perpetual Peace”), US President Woodrow Wilson paved the way for its realization by making it part of his famous Fourteen Points.
Hence the states that met in Paris, then in Geneva, were pursuing two seemingly contradictory objectives: asserting their national specificity, while taking part in a “league of peoples”. The territorial disputes of the 1920s, then the rise of nationalistic totalitarianisms, undermined this agenda. The outbreak of the Second World War was perceived as the final blow to the dream of maintaining peace only through the goodwill of states.
When considering this sequence of events, a few questions come to mind: why such a failure in regard to the initial intentions? To what extent did that experiment of the Interwar period serve as a model – or a deterrent example – within Europe itself? After 1945, did the twin logic that makes nation-states coexist alongside permanent European community institutions endowed with executive powers (the principle of subsidiarity linking the two) effectively resolve the pre-existing tensions?
To answer those questions, we will examine the key events that led to the birth of the League of Nations, exactly 90 years ago, as well as factors behind its successes and failures. In the process, we will compare the European system created by the Treaty of Versailles with the institutional forms later used for the EEC, then the European Union.
The goal of this cross-comparison will be to draw useful conclusions, if possible, about the divergences and tensions that still emerge today about to the “Europe-to-be” – and to cast a fresh look at the question of the delicate balance that remains to be found, between national sovereignty and the powers granted to the EU’s central institutions.
3rd session: “The values of political Europe: a unifying force or a source of discord?”
Date: Tuesday 27 October 2009, 2:00–6:00 PM
The authors of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (2005) and the Treaty of Lisbon (2007) banked on “European values” in order to provide a consensual definition for Europe. Yet this attempt appears to have somewhat missed the target, since debates eventually focused on fundamental differences, i.e. dichotomies, such as national independence vs. a supranational state, social democracy vs. economic liberalism, religion vs. the secular state, etc. In this case, the twin logic of the individual versus the general, which can be politically fertile when well mastered (as witness the Swiss Confederation), seems to have gone beyond the control of the promoters of the EU.
This relative failure prompts at least three questions: does this value-based definition actually provide Europe with clear political objectives? Is it sufficient to delineate European citizenship with regard to itself and to the rest of the world? Lastly, could it really inspire a popular sentiment of belonging, able to mobilise citizens?
During this session, we shall compare this value-based approach with other parallel attempts to define Europe, e.g. by the search of a pre-existing shared “identity” or by highlighting a common historical experience, while exploring new and original avenues for reflection.
4th session: Study day: “From the spirit of the Enlightenment to the ‘spirit of Lisbon’”
Date: Thursday 19 November 2009, 9.00 AM–6.00 PM
Between periods of war, the European continent has known times of intense quest for political solutions to ensure peace. Major treaties, such as the Holy Alliance, the founding of the League of Nations and later the treaties of the European Community, were forged by the gathering in a single place of people from diverse horizons. They were brought together by exceptional circumstances (typically the end of a war or the collapse of an empire) in order to work on a common reconstruction project that was, in their eyes, grandiose. These ideas and sentiments shared by a particularly active milieu are commonly referred to as spirit, such as the spirit of the Enlightenment, the spirit of Vienna (after 1815) or the spirit of Geneva (during the Interwar period), each of which played a substantial role in the history of Europe.
More recently, and with regard to Eastern and South-eastern Europe, should we assert that the existence of a fault line, from the end of the Second World War to the fall of the Iron Curtain, was merely a break in this process of European convergence that goes back to earlier periods, when the continent was considered a single entity? Lastly, would it be appropriate to speak of a “spirit of Lisbon” about the recent treaty amending the European Union (using the words as Jean-Luc Dehaene, one of its authors)?
On the occasion of this study day, we will review a chronology of key moments when the European consciousness took shape, in the specific groups and privileged milieus that were involved in these projects.
See Calendar
Lieu: IEA-Paris, Maison Suger, 16-18 rue Suger, 75006 Paris
Information: contact@paris-iea.fr
Ville et culture en Europe (Cities and culture in Europe)
EUROPEAN INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA (Switzerland)
Orientation « Cultures et sociétés », 2004-2005
Comment la culture s’imprime-t-elle dans les villes d’Europe ? Quel est l’esprit, l’identité de ces villes, comment lire la mise en scène urbaine et déchiffrer ses symboles ? Telles sont les questions reliées à un certain nombre de villes européennes et de thèmes dominants (comme le lieu de mémoire, la place urbaine, le concept de capitale culturelle, l’expérience de la ville…) que nous approfondirons à travers des textes littéraires et de sciences humaines. Ces textes témoignent tous du vécu urbain et proposent des clés d’interprétation sur le phénomène de la ville européenne.
SH, Mercredi 14h-16h
Lieu: Institut européen (IEUG), 2 rue Daniel-Colladon, 1204 Genève
Tél. secrétariat: +41 22 379 78 50/51