nationalism as distinct from Russian nationalism. With the weakening of
totalitarian controls under Gorbachev the suppressed nationalisms within the
USSR helped break it up into nation-states. This process of disintegration
has not ended there. Nationalconflicts have exploded in Georgia, Armenia
and the Chechnya region of Russia. Nationalist tensions were already present
in the new nations of the post-Soviet states, where large Russian minorities
‘policy dialogues’ (Bangura, 1997:8–17).
Three are relevant, listed from the most to least hegemonic:
• Technocracy, especially the neo-liberal economic model,
which vests authority in government technocrats and international finance experts who reduce deficits and inflation,
open markets, and promote competition and efficiency.
• Corporatism, the ‘historic class compromise’ which manages nationalconflict through bringing organized interests into policy making.
• Global sustainable pluralism, inspired by UNDP HDR
thinking about development as equitable, gender balanced
Wolfgang Wessels, Andreas Maurer, and Jürgen Mittag
governmental interests with regard to
European integration policy projects. Thus, we also look at the questions:
since ‘Maastricht’, and in comparison to the pre-Maastricht era, what are
the main policy areas of the Member States? Which European topics are
discussed in national debates? Is there any evidence to suggest that major
political events or nationalconflicts – such as national elections, changes
in government, etc. – produce important changes in the tone or style of EU
policy-making at the national level?
National adaptation: structures and procedures for European
The organisation of war-escalation in the Krajina region of Croatia 1990–91
Hannes Grandits and Carolin Leutloff
the popularisation and institutionalisation of
boundary-maintenance mechanisms in Croatia in 1990. The HDZ, which
formed the government after the ﬁrst free multi-party elections in Croatia,
increasingly integrated its nationalistic position into the newly developing postsocialist state machinery. Political antagonisms, which in the breakdown of the
socialist system and the following temporary power vacuum seemed inevitable,
aroused nationalconﬂicts between Croats and Serbs about the form and character of the new institutions of the developing national state. These
blamed for presenting the
political, social and nationalconflicts in the former Yugoslavia ‘as centurieslong conflicts between essentially opposed human types, types of cultures and
civilisations’.135 Moreover, he argued that the Church was guilty of portraying
the Croats as ‘quasi-immaculate’ while portraying Serbs as ‘the incarnation of
evil’. These two positions are a little unfair. Clearly, some priests did articulate
such views, which had an open resonance with the language used by Tuœman.
However, although Kuhariç tacitly supported the HDZ in the run-up to the