The creation of a collective identity and the European citizenship

In Aristotle words, a citizen is not a citizen because he inhabits a certain place (p76
Aristotle). Whoever is entitled to share in deliberative or udicial o!!ice he sa"s is a
citizen in that particular cit". A cit" then, spea# si$pl", is a $ultitude o! such persons
ade%uate !or sel!&su!!icienc" o! li!e ('(7)b'7 p. 77). *his de!inition has the advanta+e to
e$phasize the abstract intellectual abilities o! the citizen while re$ovin+ other
nonetheless i$portant !actors li#e lan+ua+e, territor", culture or others. As de!ined then
an"one who can hold an o!!ice can be called citizen. ,o$ehow we need to pa" attention
to the word entitled here. *he de!inition is not ver" e-plicit about the condition o!
entitle$ent leavin+ there!ore loose end to the leaders o! a re+i$e to de!ine the condition
o! entitle$ent. *hese conditions in $an" cases will distin+uish between who belon+s or
does not belon+ to a co$$unit". In delineatin+ the li$it o! the cit" or the state, ele$ent
li#e territor", population and an authorit" are now reco+nized b" the international law as
the e$pirical ele$ents o! the state.
.ernard /iesen and 0laus eder identi!" three conception o! citizenship1 individualist,
political and the collective identit".
2ver since its creation the concept and the realit" o! state has under+one an
e-traordinar" develop$ent and has shown such a re!erential e!!icac" that toda" it is less
li#el" to thin# o! an alternative s"ste$. 3evertheless, the develop$ent o! co$$unication,
the increasin+ inte+ration o! the world econo$" and the +rowth o! re+ional, transnational
or+anizations as shown b" the recent 4ost World War II era raise $an" %uestions about its
!uture. 5r+anizations li#e the 2uropean 6o$$unit" (now the 2uropean 7nion), the
A387, (Australia, 3ew 8ealand, 7.,) the A!rican 7nion and $an" others co$posed o!
states, b" their re+ulations and status, so$ehow ta#e decisions that (in $an" cases) are
co$pellin+ i! not superior to national le+islations. *he +rowth in the co$pellin+ power o!
these or+anizations does not happen without conse%uences.
When the creation o! supranational institutions reduces or replaces the authorit"
o! the national institutions, it is the whole political co$$unit" co$$onl" re!erred to as
nation&state that is a!!ected and trans!or$ed. *his trans!or$ation does not +o without
a!!ectin+ the citizen whose sel! realization in 4ierre 9anent:s thou+hts (man as a free
and rational being cannot fulfill himself except in a political community, with all the
consequences (not all of them pleasant) that this entails p.';') depend on a political
co$$unit". Althou+h he was not %uite e-plicit about the nature o! this co$$unit", a
ph"sical ele$ent occupies a central place in the construction o! that co$$unit" that is the
territor". .rin+in+ di!!erent territories to+ether could certainl" create a !usion o! stren+th
and opportunit" and hasten a political inte+ration. <owever i! the political inte+ration
could be hastened throu+h political decisions, it is less li#el" to be the case !or the social
inte+ration which so$ehow is one o! the $ost i$portant as an avenue to the creation o! a
post national de$os which brin+ to+ether people !ro$ di!!erent nationalities. *he search
!or those co$$onalities is one o! the $ain proble$s !aced b" nations in transition
process toward the trans!er o! authorit" (or the substitution o! national soverei+nt") to a
supranational power.
*he recent histor" o! 2uropean nations is %uite illustrative o! this process. =i+ht a!ter the
,econd World War, $an" o! these nations a+reed on the idea that there were not to be an"
'
other ar$ed con!rontation on 2uropean soil an"$ore. 5ne wa" to achieve this +oal was
to la" the !oundation !or a political, econo$ic and social inte+ration o! the continent. *his
led in to the creation b" si- countries o! the 226 in =o$e in ';)7. >ro$ an econo$ic
co$$unit" what is nowada"s re!erred to as the 2uropean 7nion has +rown over decades
in size and or+anization to the e-tent that $ore and $ore the $ain issue is the adoption o!
a 2uropean constitution. .ut i! in $an" respect these nations can be +iven credit !or what
have been achieved so !ar in ter$s o! political inte+ration, econo$ic throu+h the adoption
o! the euro in ';;; and the $ain ter$s o! the 9aastricht treat" which stipulates that..,
there re$ains other crucial and i$portant issue to be resolved be!ore the union could be
solid and.. that is the social inte+ration o! the continent. *his can onl" happen throu+h the
devise o! a co$$on polic" o! citizenship.
In .ernard /iesen words the creation o! a collective identit" is a $ore pro$isin+
paradi+$ in the process o! the creation o! a 2uropean citizenship. <ow will such an
identit" be created? 5ne o! 9anent:s ar+u$ents in respondin+ to this %uestion is that.
*erritor" is i$portant as
*erritor" is an ele$ent but it is not the onl" one that will pro$ote social inte+ration
cultural values or are certainl" $ore i$portant in collective
*his essa" will e-plore the wa"s in which this creation can be possible and what are the
possible challen+es it presents to... o! citizenship.
*he pro$otion o! the li!e o! virtue as the classical philosophers e-
It is understood that there are di!!erent traditions o! citizenship in 2urope. I! the creation
o! a collective identit" should be re+arded as the best avenue to the creation o! a
2uropean citizenship, there is certainl", as ,h$itter observed it, a need to conver+e all
these di!!erent traditions to create a 2uropean citizenship. Which !or$ which will it
ta#e?
@@@
*he new develop$ent in the inte+ration o! the 2uropean countries raises $an" %uestions
about the construction o! a collective identit" and the creation o! a co$$on citizenship.
*he reection o! the 2uropean constitution as b" shows that social inte+ration will not
be eas" and conse%uentl" on paper a 2uropean citizen $a" e-ist but the realit" o! the !act
shows otherwise. .e!ore proceedin+ it is i$portant to +o over the $ain conceptions o!
citizenship su++ested b" $an" author and anal"ze the $ost pro$isin+ concepts !or the
creation o! the 2uropean citizenship.
.ernard /iesen and 0laus 2der !irst observe that *he $odern conception o! citizenship is co$$onl"
considered as en+endered b" the rhetoric o! the >rench revolution shi!ted the $eanin+ o! citizenship !ro$
the e-clusive de$arcation o! a privile+ed +roup to the continual inclusion o! new +roups into the e-pansive
de$os.
*his concept see$s close to the A$erican concept as what characterizes and distin+uishes an A$erican is
not the !act that he is livin+ on the continental A$erican soil but..
6itizenship i! one loo# into it is no $ore than a relation between the individual and his state o! ori+in.
.ernard /iesen and sa" that 6itizenship is co$$onl" considered as a !ace relatin+ the state and the
civil societ", +overn$ent, and the people, the territorial political or+anization and its $e$bers.
*he" unli#e the classical aristotelician concept, Identi!ied three conception o! citizenship.*hree paradi+$s
the" believe e-plain this relationship1 individual, political and the collective identit" paradi+$1
(
& *he individual paradi+$ which is citizenship viewed !ro$ the perspective o! the state, re!ers to a
set o! ele$entar" $e$bership ri+hts which are e%ual !or all individual $e$bers and it is
insensitive to social, econo$ic, or cultural di!!erences between the$. 4. )
& 4olitical paradi+$
Aiewed !ro$ the perspective o! civil societ", citizenship re!ers to practice o! participation in co$$on
a!!airs and public debate about political issues. )
& 6ollective identit" paradi+$
Aiewed !ro$ the perspective o! collective identit", it re!ers to the routine practices and rules o! solidarit",
co$pro$ise, and decent behavior. It re!ers to cultural ideas o! virtue, icons o! +ood $e$bership, and
$"ths o! de!endin+ a sense o! co$$onness a+ainst so$e outside ene$".6
the last two paradi+$s are $ore pro$isin+ !or the" !acilitate Bthe continual inclusion o!
new +roups into the e-pansive de$os: as the" put.
it is less obvious to contend that there is a 2uropean de$os li#e one $a" clai$ with so$e
s$all ris# in the case o! the 7,. *he diversit" o! nationalities on the continent the old
ethnic %uarrel and the nu$ber o! lan+ua+es spo#en on the continent clearl" show that a
de$os that cross the boundaries o! the states is a priori not possible. .ut e$phasizin+
these ele$ent o! individual identit" would onl" reduce the chance o! social inte+ration
and show that it is i$possible to construct a 2uropean nation. Is there an"thin+ li#e a
european nation or there is onl" a 2urope o! nation? A clear&cut answer to this %uestion is
not possible at this sta+e o! the evolution o! the continent even thou+h $an" thin+s have
been achieved in the e!!ort o! construction o! the continent
*his said !or a 2uropean citizenship to e-ist the politics o! citizenship i! there is an"
When we ta#e the case o! the 7,, thou+h the Bpeople: o! the united states are $ade o!
di!!erent ethnic +roups, the" all identi!ied with the sa$e principles o!., the sa$e
!ederal constitution, and respect the sa$e institutions. *he reverse has been true in
2urope despite the tre$endous e!!ort shown latel" toward a !ull inte+ration o! the
continent. *he nature o! this inte+ration is still hi+hl" debated. And the con!usion o! its
nature $i+ht well a!!ect the perception o! citizenship .
*al#in+ about a 2uropean nation or citizenship there!ore re%uires that the e-istence o! a
collective identit". .ut how is this collective identit" constructed?
Accordin+ to .ernard, collective identit" is not naturall" +iven but sociall" constructed and
publicl" sta+ed. 4.C6

as the .ritish ournalist peter 3or$an recentl" noted, the 9aastricht treat" $ar#ed the zenith o! top
down 27 polic"&$a#in+ in which leaders e-e$pli!ied b" the !or$er /er$an chancellor <el$ut 0ohl and
the >rench e-&president >ranDois 9itterrand prescribed !ar&reachin+ chan+es !or their citizens which barel"
atte$pted to e-plain and still less to consult. *he wea#nesses o! this approach were clearl" shown in ';;(
when a Eanish re!erendu$ reected the treat". *he convention to which the Fae#en su$$it concluded will
be an atte$pt to institute a botto$ up approach to 27 re!or$. Wi$ >.A Aanthoor p.--ii
.ernard /iesen1
3ational identit" and citizenship1 the cases o! /er$an" and >rance.
,aid that collective identit" is ta#en !or +ranted b" those who appeal to. >or hi$, collective identit" is not
naturall" +iven but sociall" constructed and publicl" sta+ed. 4.C6
Identi!ies three t"pe o! collective identit"1
& 4ri$ordialis$1
C
6ollective identit" here is related to e$piricall" +iven conditions (li#e territor" or #inship) that cannot
be chan+ed b" voluntar" actions c! boo#
& 7niversalis$
*he second t"pe in the construction o! a collective identit" in anal"sis lin#s the
constitutive boundar" between us and the$ to a particular relation o! a collectivit" to
the transcendental real$ o! reason and per!ection
6lai$ access to privile+e based on historical $ission, special awareness o! universal
reason and pro+ress cen
*his code $a" see$ !ascinatin+ and $ore pro$isin+ as a wa" to construct 2uropean
citizenship. .ut it see$s to overloo# one !actor that actuall" $a#es it practicalit" in the
case o! 2uropean citizenship $ore %uestionable. Are 2uropeans +oin+ to +ive up
historical $e$or"..? <ow $uch will that wei+ht or not in the construction o! this
political co$$unit" which is supposed to help the$ !ul!ill the$selves?
9ore directl" is a >rench willin+ to share the sa$e cultural herita+e as a /er$an Italian
or 2n+lish?
.e!ore $a#in+ an" su++estions, it is i$portant to consider the present situation o!
citizenship in euroep . the $ain cases studies are those o! 2n+land, !rance and +er$an".
G