Identity’s Archipelago

Life on the islands of Åland: a special place for autonomy, pacifism and cooperation. A territorial entity lying between Finland and Sweden and taken as model for the resolution of ethnic conflicts in Europe

Some years ago I visited the Åland Islands (pronounced: Oland; Ahvenanmaa is the name in Finnish), a small archipelago located in the Baltic Sea between Sweden and Finland.

Aland Archipelago
Aland Archipelago

The summer was very bright, as often happens so far north. Magnificent views of the islands of Kökar, or the smaller Källskär, across whose peaceful horizons the Swedish-speaking Finnish author Tove Jannson wrote some of her books.
But in addition to the landscapes, I was impressed to discover that the identity of Åland’s inhabitants also comes through the realities on the islands, its autonomy, peace and disarmament.
The name of Åland had appeared as an example for a political solution in the negotiations (but then blocked) on the status of Kosovo, but also for the separatist republics within both Georgia (Abkhazia and South Ossetia) and Azerbaijan (Nagorno-Karabakh). This is not the first time that the archipelago has been proposed as a model for solving inter-ethnic conflicts, or those between a majority and a minority within the same territory.

It is obvious that the conflicts that have broken out in recent years in Europe, especially those related to ethnicity, are extremely difficult to solve and present very complex issues. It is also true that the population of Åland is small: just 26,000 people, virtually all Swedish-speaking. Of these, 11,000 live in Mariehamn, the capital, with another 13,000 in the countryside and a further 2,000 on the islands. A mere 80 out of the 6,429 islands and islets that make up the archipelago are inhabited.

The example of Åland has, however, become a reference point for the provision of conditions that safeguard the cultural and linguistic rights of a homogeneous minority within the sovereignty of a state with a different majority.

The islands lie at the centre of a small Euroregion which also includes other coastal archipelagos belonging to Sweden and Finland.

A bit of history

Belonging to the Kingdom of Sweden until the Napoleonic Wars of 1808-1809 when it passed to Russia, the Åland islands were integrated into the Grand Duchy of Finland, which at the time enjoyed a semi-autonomous status within the Czarist Empire. For the Russians they represented an important strategic bulwark in the Baltic and were manned as a outpost during the Crimean War. Following the Treaty of Paris (1856) the islands were subject to demilitarisation.
In December 1917, after the October Revolution, Finland became independent. For obvious political, linguistic and cultural reasons the islanders wished to opt for reunification with Sweden. Instead, they only wrested the status of autonomy from the Finnish Parliament in 1920, a status they considered inadeguate.
The issue was settled in 1921 by the newly-formed League of Nations (the forerunner of the United Nations, the UN), whose Council decided in favour of a Finnish Åland. The islands, however, were granted very broad autonomy which guaranteed language rights and confirmed the area’s demilitarisation and neutrality. As a result of the Autonomy Act (1922), revised twice (in 1951 and 1993), Åland enjoys one of the highest degrees of self-governance in Europe.

Autonomy

Panorama
Panorama

The Parliament, opened in 1978, is actually a small three-storey building in the capital Mariehamn. There sit the 40 members and visiting it you appreciate the almost family atmosphere that surrounds it. Stripped of any formalities and wearing a simple blue shirt, Roger Nordlund, now President of the Parliament and, at the time of my visit, Vice-President of the Government of Islands (the Landskapsstyrelse), said: “Finland handles foreign policy, criminal law, the courts, currency and a part of taxation, while we administer the share that goes to local communities. The Lagting, the Åland Parliament has jurisdiction over everything else. The archipelago also has a fixed representative in the Finnish Parliament and the name ‘Åland’ also appears on the (Finnish) passports of its inhabitants. The Act stipulates that the only official language is Swedish, although in the courts citizens can also submit their applications in Finnish.

The economy of the islands, which in 1954 got its own flag and has been issuing its own stamps since 1984, is based on the shipbuilding industry, trade and tourism. “Forestry is more important for Finland” adds Nordlund.

On 1st July 1999 a directive of the European Union (EU) came into force which saw the disappearance of duty-free areas, where it had been possible to buy all sorts of goods without paying VAT. One of the few exceptions to the ruling is Åland”.

The giant ferries of the ‘Vikingâ’ and ‘Silja’ shipping companies connecting Finland and Sweden, as well as the smallest company, ‘Eckerö’, are registered in Mariehamn. Traffic through Åland involving the enormous ships has greatly increased in recent years, from Stockholm to Turku, but also connecting the Swedish capital and Helsinki. Tallinn in Estonia is also now on the routes.
Ticket prices are low because most of the revenue, about 75%, comes from duty-free purchases on the ships. The focus is on alcohol which is expensive on the mainland. An overnight journey on one of these ferries, which in fact are genuine cruise ships with bars, clubs, discos, and saunas, only confirms the Nordic reputation as hardened drinkers, especially weekends which witness scenes that hardly bear description.

“To preserve this condition a special protocol was signed with the EU, which cannot be modified by Brussels directives, so that the duty-free status remains in force even after 1999. It was too important to our economy. The Åland islands have thus acquired the status of a ‘special territory’ which remains excluded from the harmonisation of taxation rules. They have been able to maintain the duty-free, creating a de facto customs barrier to union with the rest of the EU that puts producers in the archipelago at a disadvantage. Clearly, however, the move seems worth it, a fact confirmed by referendum in which 74% of the islanders were in favour of entry into the EU.

In the future I think we will depend increasingly on tourism, focusing mainly on quality“, continues Nordlund. “As in other Nordic countries, the flagship of Åland is the natural environment, especially for cycling, fishing or camping, but the tourist season is very short and confined to the summer months. For the rest of the year the ferries are still needed, with a ‘short stop-off’ in the islands allowing them to retain their duty-free status.”

On Åland, if the truth be told, ties with Finland are not so strong. Knowing only Finnish it would be impossible to get by, although in Helsinki there is bilingualism and although elsewhere in the country Swedish is the second official language, only 6% of the 5 million Finns have Swedish as their mother tongue. “We know we are Finnish citizens, but we are very close to Sweden, as far as linguistic and cultural issues are concerned. People here watch Swedish TV and read Swedish newspapers. In general relations with Finland are good, although on some occasions we have differing opinions, but this is a perfectly normal struggle between the centre and the periphery. With regard to monetary union, there is no advantage for us as long as Sweden remain outside the Euro-zone as an important slice of our trade is done with them.” The inhabitants of Åland therefore look more towards Stockholm, although there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that the current state of affairs represents the best option for them.

A substantial part of the taxes levied is spent on education, and to ensure that schools and shops survive even on the smaller islands which are at risk of total depopulation. In addition, one third of the islands students continue their education in Finland, the rest go to Sweden. Most return home after completing their studies, but many stay away. “In the 1950’s everyone who left emigrated to Sweden. Some of their children, who came here on vacation in the summer, have decided to return.” stresses Nordlund.
Given all the peculiarities of the archipelago, the law on residence is very strict. “I have lost my rights to live on Åland, although I was born there and still own my father’s house there.” confesses Erland Eklund, professor at the Swedish University of Social Sciences in Helsinki, “This happens if you live away from the islands for more than five years, as was the case with me.

Identity

In 1921 the demilitarization of Åland took place. No installations, activities or military personnel may be stationed on its territory, even exercises are not permitted, and the Finnish navy cannot enter the territorial waters around the islands. In addition, for many years young islanders have been exempt from military service if they have been resident on the islands since the age of 12.

After ten years of discussions on how to tackle the study of peace from both a theoretical and practical perspective, the ‘Ålands Fredsinstitut’ – the Åland Islands Peace Institute – was created in 1992.
The identity of the inhabitants of the archipelago, stimulated by the various peculiarities and helped by their own symbols, has strengthened over time. Today almost all the islanders consider themselves as simply inhabitants of Åland rather than Finnish or Swedish. “The local identity passes ever more frequently through aspects such as autonomy and neutrality” explains Sia Spiliopoulou Åkermark, Director of the Institute, speaking on the phone to me. With a Greek father and Swedish mother, she is an expert in international law.
“There is a certain pride in belonging to a demilitarised region” she continues. “You can see this from the way tourist attractions such as the fortress of Bomarsund, the Russian base built in 1852 and destroyed by the British and the French in the Crimean War, are presented, emphasising that this was the last conflict fought on the islands.”

The example of Åland for the resolution of conflicts should be set against the context in which its current status arose. “At the time of the Crimean War it was not easy, but all parties involved were open to compromise. Even in modern conflicts, an agreement can only be reached with this precondition.”
The Institute is working on EU projects that promote Baltic cooperation, carrying out studies. These are often comparative and related to the archipelago’s peculiarities such as demilitarisation, cooperation on security at European level, the rights and participation of minorities, autonomy – studies that it then publishes. It has also created a network of non-governmental organisations in the Baltic region, mostly in Lithuania, Belarus and the Russian territory of Kaliningrad, especially catering for young people and women in difficulty.
One of the current internal challenges involves immigration. “Until now the islands have remained ethnically homogeneous, but new inputs to the system are required. The average age of the population is rising and there is a need for young people, including foreigners, to come and live here, but decisions involving immigration are not in the hands of the local autonomous Parliament but are made by the Finnish state. Here as well there is a need for mediation.”

The population does not know the legal details and conditions of the islands autonomy but realises their uniqueness. “The system foresees “motors” that will always keep open the possibility of negotiations and discussions. The Governor is a representative of the Finnish state, but appointed on the advice of the President of the Parliament of Åland and there is also a joint delegation consisting of representatives of the two parties. The third level comes through the adherence to EU legislation.” concludes the director. “The limits of autonomy are therefore continually re-negotiated, and this is one of the keys to the success of Åland.” x

Author of this story: Alessandro Gori

Alessandro Gori
Alessandro Gori

Alessandro Gori (born in Udine, Italy in 1970) as an independent journalist has published photos and articles in ten different languages in daily newspapers and magazines in 15 countries on a wide range of themes. He specialises in the Balkans, the former Soviet Union, Northern Europe and Latin America.

Neighbours aren’t strangers

40 years of the history of borders in the life of the writer Drago Jančar, who doesn’t believe in multiculturalism but DOES believe in culture “because by definition men of culture are curious, open and given to accepting the culture of others without renouncing their own”

Jančar - Portrait
Jančar - Portrait

Drago Jančar was born in 1948 in Maribor, where he studied law and worked as a journalist (1971-1974). This was followed by a period as a freelance writer (1974-1978), and a dramaturge at ”Viba Film” in Ljubljana. Since 1980, he has been the secretary and editor-in-chief of the ‘Slovenska matica’ publishing house. He has been awarded American, Austrian and British scholarships. Novels and short stories have been published in numerous languages. He often gives readings and lectures in prominent cultural centres around the world. He has won a number of awards, including the PreÅ¡eren Award (the highest Slovene recognition for achievements in culture), the European award for short fiction, the Herder Prize, and the Jean Améry Award for essay writing at the last year’s Frankfurt Book Fair.

Q You were born in Maribor, a town lying along the Drava river, halfway between Vienna and the Adriatic. For 30 years, you have been living in Ljubljana, but you are still attached to Maribor and you often find yourself travelling to Triest where your recent books have earned you a warm welcome.
How do the landscape and your mood change on your way to Triest?

A I get very excited when I come to Triest and see my novel ‘Northern Lights’ or ‘Ringing in My Head’ or the collection of short stories ‘Joyce’s Pupil’ in bookshops. Now I feel more at home in Triest than before. It’s not that Triest didn’t feel like home before – since the 1970s, this diagonal between Maribor and Triest, the old Central European route Vienna-Triest, has served as a link to a more open world. At the end of this road was a geographically open space, as well as a city characterized by cultural and political openness. At that time, I often met with Boris Pahor who wasn’t as famous as today. Later I realised, and I hope that the inhabitants of Triest won’t find themselves offended, that Triest, too, had its provincial dimensions manifested not only in its aversion to Slovenes and other foreigners, but also in the fact that its cultural vibrancy was not as strong as that of Ljubljana. Despite this recognition of Triest’s darker sides, I still remember the journeys from Maribor through Ljubljana, the centre where I became recognised as a writer, to Triest a sort of cross-section of life that then extends itself to many other European and American cities.
Q You have mentioned the Central European area. Is this not only a ‘meteorological phenomenon’ as it used to be called in the past?
A Central Europe (Mitteleuropa) is no longer such an interesting notion as it was in the time when it was promoted by Claudio Magris, György Konrád and other intellectuals, as well as people living behind the so-called Iron Curtain. Yugoslavia wasn’t situated behind the real Iron Curtain: in the mid-1960s, we were allowed to travel beyond its borders with our passports if they had not been taken away – as mine was – and so we lived in a fairly open world. The discussion on Central Europe and on how to transcend borders was an attempt to overcome the wire barriers between Czechoslovakia and Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Austria, mine fields and guards. There existed a farily closed world, and the discussion on Central Europe was an attempt to open the borders and space in order to get an area where cultures could function more freely and where – and now we come to meteorology and to something I’ve written elsewhere – people and ideas could move round the globe as the clouds float across the sky.
Q And so we’ve come to mobility. Now we are part of Europe, which is more important than Central Europe, as well as of a globalised world. Does mobility stand for rapid changes in the environment and the adaptation to new cultural patterns?
A Central Europe is not only a phenomenon from a certain historical moment, that is the 1980s, or a cultural phenomenon and a goal we had. It is first and foremost a geographical and historical notion. We share our history. We saw conflicts, as well as periods of good co-operation. We lived in the same countries, but then the borders started changing. I believe that Central Europe still exists. People who witnessed all these drastic historic shifts and changes in borders lived differently to people elsewhere. This part of Europe is different, just as Mediterranean Europe differs from Northern Europe. The issues of globalisation, rapid changes and so on have strengthened my belief that first we have to show interest in our local characteristics and only then in establishing ties between large regional and national entities. At the same time, we also have to cherish memories of excellent things and catastrophes that this area has witnessed, which makes it interesting, original and special.
Q You are an advocate of storytelling, of stories that we give to one another, with the aim of getting to know one another better. Here’s an example: your short story ‘Joyce’s Pupil’, which has given the title to your entire book of short fiction, talks about Boris Furlan from Triest.
A Precisely this story about Boris Furlan, Joyce’s pupil, talks about the continual change of cultures and places he underwent: he moved from Ljubljana to Triest, Zürich, and London, to return to Ljubljana, find himself in prison, and then moved to a village in the Gorenjska region. Furlan saw different ideological systems and states, he experienced Fascism, cherished hopes in Communism only to be disappointed … He travelled around and experienced changes as only a few Europeans did. The writer often finds himself in the role of such an observer.
Q There is no end to conflicts. Why is it so difficult to foster dialogue between people, even between neighbours, why does xenophobia keep resurrecting itself in new forms?
A Neighbours are not strangers to one another. I spent half of my life in the vicinity of the Slovene-Austrian border where people used to live in harmony, share the same stories, fight together against the Turks, drought and grasshoppers, convene sessions in the town hall … And then the divisions began. We were divided by culture, however paradoxical this may sound. Slovenes were justified in raising the issue of the rights of the Slovene language, in turning to our brothers in Prague or even in faraway Moscow. And so we grew apart, only to find ourselves in the 20th century that brought us national and ideological conflicts and new states. If misunderstandings still arise, they are caused by the past, by deep frustrations on both sides of the border. They thrive in Istria, Primorska and Triest, as well as in northern part of Slovenia, in Maribor. Everywhere there are memories of the things that happened before, during and after war. Some people believe that these misunderstandings, which generate new conflicts and problems in communication, can be solved by forgetting the past and focusing on the future. On the contrary, we have to be familiar with these things, with all the tragic events, from the Trieste trials against the Slovenes to the killing of the foibe that happened after WWII. This will make our dialogue easier. Greater curiosity and openness are the preconditions for better understanding. I’d dare to say that they are more often found on the Slovene side. We are familiar with Italian history and culture, which is logical as theirs is an ancient culture, while Italians living along the border are not familiar with Slovene culture. Things have been getting better lately. To know the past, culture and interests of your neighbours is a fundamental thing.
Q Which most probably applies to new immigrants as well.
A In principle, this is the same story, yet we are afraid to face it as it is somehow material in nature. An increasing number of immigrants means increased pressure on public services. People who have lived here for long time and have paid taxes find it difficult to accept that. I would say that it will be easier to overcome cultural differences. Other issues will have to be solved by politics: how to integrate immigrants into society, how to ensure them access to public services without making the local population furious or bad-tempered.
Q You believe in intercultural dialogue, which is now on the agenda of European politicians. All of a sudden, culture matters.
A Brussels bureaucracy is often obsessed with a certain topic, at the moment its intercultural dialogue. Yet this is not a new topic. The idea emerged at least 15 or 20 years ago under the term ‘multiculturalism’. In my opinion, we don’t need multiculturalism or intercultural dialogue. What we need is culture since cultural people are, by definition, curious and open, and accept another culture without renouncing their own. By saying intercultural dialogue, we imply that there are two very different cultures, which might be indeed the case, but by saying so, we have addressed the subject from two separate sides. Cultural dialogue or dialogue on culture would be a better way of putting it.
Q When writing about European soul, you refer to Jacques Delors … What kind of soul does Europe need?
A I quoted a passage in which Delors referred above all to culture. If it wants to become a living organism, Europe cannot only be a sum of interests, which it still is. New states that have joined Europe with enthusiasm, including Slovenia, are well aware that Europe is interested in new markets, and would like to enter that market and partake in progress and welfare. This is a good basis, which functions well, but it is not an organism that would survive major friction. Such a Europe can fall apart. The soul of Europe is culture, into which we should integrate its tradition. The latter encompasses Christianity, which was the first to establish Europe as a united area, the Enlightenment, which placed man, the citizen at its centre, as well as the achievements of the French Revolution, and even uncontaminated socialist achievements such as the welfare state and solidarity. All these elements make the history of Europe, its soul, which is, of course, also reflected in modern philosophical and artistic phenomena.
Q You claim that literature plays an important role in the sphere of culture. However, globalization has many side effects, from the spread of instant culture to reverence for internet and multimedia communication… How can literature compete with them?
A In my opinion, it no longer can and this battle has been lost. Literature will most probably survive in more elite circles. I can’t imagine that literature with its abundance of stories, metaphors and associations would not survive, as it meets the needs of our deeper being, just like religion or certain social activities. Literature will no longer be the phenomenon that would change the world or had an impact on it as it did in the 20th century.
Q Do you believe that writing is a mission? How can a writer be socially engaged – you yourself differentiate between fiction writing and writing for newspapers or magazines – how can a writer make himself useful?
A I think it is enough to write stories or poems to be a useful person. Oscar Wilde once said that art is the most useless thing in the world. But paradoxically, he claims that without art people would lead more miserable lives. Without some form of art, they would not live at all. That’s why literature matters. It cannot replace sermons or social solutions, what it can do is to help man understand himself, the world, other stories with which he can juxtapose his own experience and the wealth of language. There’s no need to be a socially engaged writer. I am one because that’s my way of responding to things.
Q How do you view translation? On what does it depend?
A It will never be possible to translate everything into all languages. Well, technically yes, but who’d be interested in that? The pressure of minor Central European nations to win recognition has its limits. We can’t expect that everyone knows all Slovene literature, just like we don’t know the literature of others. Of course, we have to strive to have as mush translated as possible. People are getting more curious. However, once the Slovene presidency to the EU is over, the increased interest in Slovenia will return to normal.
Q What is the descriptive desire that you mention in ‘Joyce’s Pupil’ when Boris Furlan cannot describe a lamp owing to language problems? What does it stand for in your writing?
A This is a very important question. All at once, I realised that this is the motto of my writing, this wish to describe things, to label them with words; the lamp, relations between two people, the connection of love, social questions, nature. All at once, I became aware that the ‘descriptive desire’, as Furlan puts it, can be also found in my desire to write. In the story, Joyce tells his pupil to describe an oil lamp. Furlans says that he feels emptiness in his head, which turns into the central metaphor of the short story, as he will feel that same emptiness when sentenced to death at his trial in Ljubljana. This is a metaphor for the mystery of literature. Words, passionate descriptions, they’re all stronger than the acts of saving the world even if writers can be socially engaged. Literature is stronger. Joyce left Triest because of WWI; according to Furlan, he got scared, while Furlan, a Slovene from Triest and an advocate of liberal values, stood up to Fascism, was sentenced, escaped to Ljubljana, came into conflict with Communism and was sentenced as an English spy… The emptiness in his head is the emptiness arising from saving the world. There was something he didn’t understand. He was sure Joyce was a weirdo because of his descriptive desire. These are two principles that I leave open: setting the world to rights and describing it. x

Our area is now central to the entire continent

Andrea Tomat, president of the ‘Lotto’ sportswear company:

“North-east Italy must obtain fiscal federalism and compete globally along with Slovenia and Carinthia

test
Unindustria - Tomat

Born in Udine, Andrea Tomat began his career in the Eaton Corporation and in 1987 started working for Lotto clothing company. In 1998, together with Adriano Sartor, he bought out the Stonefly company. In 1999, as the head of a consortium of entrepreneurs, he acquired the Lotto brand-name and became President and Director General of the company that has its headquarters in the Province of Treviso, in Veneto. Between 2004 and 2008 he was President of Unindustria Treviso (the local association of entrepreneurs) and since 2004 has been on the governing body of the Italian business body Confindustria, and, since 2005 President of the Fondazione Nord-Est (the North-east Foundation). In April 2008 he became the new President of the Italian national committee of the International Chamber of Commerce.

Q What advantages do you see in the new Euroregional institution?
A The Euroregion is a project that, in the past, was called the Alpe Adria community, which was born, as we all know, well before the fall of the Berlin Wall and therefore in a context that is radically different from today. It is an idea that has found a new relevance, given the progressive expansion of the European Union and one that enjoys broad support from the Italian Regions of Veneto and Friuli Venezia Giulia and, I also believe, in Austria, Slovenia and Croatia.
It is the new Europe of 27, and, more generally, the phenomenon of globalisation, that favour the creation of homogenous transboundary regions. These are, in any case, foreseen by Community regulations and are, in fact, the Euroregions. Particularly in this case, as for businesses, it poses the question of size and the identification of areas suitable for initiatives favouring territorial competitiveness.
Q As a North-east Italian businessman, what message would you like to put forward in this respect?
A At this point in time there’s a widespread awareness that this area has assumed a new centrality for the Continent and a role as a node on at least three important European connecting routes (Corridors 5 and 1 and the Autostrade del mare, that is ‘sea-motorways’ in Italian). It is, above all, this geographical position that means that these regions share the same needs and similar objectives. The Euroregion could, together with the respective national governments, help coordinate the investments that are being made in this field, and, of course, favour the institutional, economic and cultural relationships in this area.
Q Is the concept of territoriality still relevant in a globalised market?
A Yes, of course; even more so in a capitalism of people and territories such as that found in Italy, and especially in the North-east, along with the regions that may well go to make up the Euroregion. The internationalisation of businesses, and this is a crucial step for many sectors, should not be seen as an alternative to the identifying themselves as part of a local community and an industrial tradition that is profoundly our own. In fact this could actually become our brand in getting ourselves known and appreciated at a global level.
Q What impetus can a multicultural context supply to an entrepreneurial activity such as yours?
A Operating in a multilingual and multicultural context is an opportunity for everyone and each and every business and is present in the DNA of our production systems, accustomed as we are to always searching for new opportunities and partnerships in Europe and the world.
Q What behaviour would you like to see from the various nation States and from the Italians in particular when it comes to the delegation of certain powers to organisations such as the Euroregion?
A With North-Eastern Italy in mind, the creation of a Euroregion obviously comes after the carrying out of reforms that lead towards fiscal federalism. These would give the Region Veneto the powers and resources already enjoyed by the two autonomous Regions that also go to make up the area: Trentino – Alto Adige and Friuli – Venezia Giulia. A federal organisation, I’d like to emphasise, has always been the state of affairs in Austria as well as in Germany – and Slovenia is working towards a regionalised model. As I said in my recent address to the Assembly of Unindustria in Treviso, for whom I have just finished my term as President: a real and efficient federalism represents a precondition in North-east Italy to give life both to our (disadvantaged) interior and an effective metropolitan dimension. Through the construction of a European macroregion, this would allow us to link up with Carinthia, Slovenia, Istria and Dalmatia. In any case, this is the new frame of reference and we must measure ourselves against it without delay. x

Attachments across borders: merely enrichment

“To feel attached to the cultures and people across the border and to remember our common history can enrich our identity as Italians, Austrians or Slovenes”, explains Josef Langer, a sociologist based in Klagenfurt (Carinthia), who sees Euroregions as a completely new supranational reality. He adds that the much more serious risk is to get lost in the numerous commercialised and pseudo-political identities offered by the forces of globalisation

Josef Langer
Josef Langer

Josef Langer is a sociologist working at the Institute of Sociology at the Alpen-Adria University of Klagenfurt. He specialises in theories of globalisation, identity and interculturalism. He has widely researched the social processes surrounding EU integration and has written extensively on these topics.

Q Many think that the new EU legislation on European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) should form the legal framework for the construction of a Euroregion covering Slovenia, Southern Austria, North-eastern Italy and North-western Croatia. According to the relevant regulation, pre-existing political and administrative bodies (Regions, Land, States and Provinces) should jointly contribute some of their administrative powers to this crossborder Euroregion. How do you think this new institution could challenge the perception of the roles of the Nation-States in our society?
A The EGTC offers a complete new definition of state border: I mean it represents a change from a national to a supranational reality. The ‘genetic code’ of EU institutions which requires a ‘pooling of sovereignty’ is being applied for the first time to the borders of Member States. This legislation provides an instrument for the common management, use and administration of a set of strictly defined and agreed matters. Whereas the Interregs and other previous EU cross-border instruments were conventional in the sense that independent organizations from different states cooperated, the EGTC has the potential to create a single supranational organisation for administering the border – from a line of control and distinction the border moves to become a place of common utilisation. Its implementation would mean a complete negation of the nation state in an important element of its identity – the outer boundary. However, for the time being I do not see any attempt in the Alps-Adriatic space to use the EGTC in such a manner. The new cross-border projects for the 2007-2013 period seem to continue in conventional patterns of inter-state cooperation and refer to the EGTC, if at all, only rhetorically.
Q Do you think that a Euroregional identity could be considered more relevant compared to the discourses of identity offered by Nation-States?
A The supportive attitude towards cross-border cooperation which we observe in today’s Zeitgeist, the ever-growing cross-border business activities together with EU funding of cross-border cooperation, stimulates awareness of what is going on in the territories across national borders amongst significant numbers of people. The recognition and realisation of cross-border opportunities bind people together, creating a feeling of community on the basis of mutual advantage. In the Alps-Adriatic territories there is an additional factor for creating community and this is centuries of common history prior to WWI. For the people between the Alps and Adriatic the time of their separation into nation states is much shorter than that of being together in the past. Hapsburg rule left many constructions and buildings in these territories which can create a feeling of communality even amongst those who are not historically involved. Demonstrating an Alps-Adriatic cross-border identity could be seen as a ‘soft’ asset for building relations and developing common projects.
However, as I indicated before, we live in an era of multiple identities and, even more, of Western individualism and the dominance of particular interests connected with it. In this precarious situation for all collective identities the conflict between regional cross-border identity and a national identity such as Italian or Slovene need not be feared. In fact, my personal opinion is a feeling of attachment to the cultures and peoples across the borders and remembering our common history can enrich our identities as Italians, Austrians or Slovenes. Moreover, collective identities are also linked to material conditions, and here the Nation State is still more competitive than cross-border situations. Today I see no antagonism between the cross-border identity and the national identity, at least not in the Alps-Adriatic area.
The much greater risk, in my opinion, is getting lost in the numerous commercialised and pseudo-political identities offered by the forces ofglobalisation. Let us not forget, that in certain contemporary socialmilieus identifying with the logo of arbitrary global brands is moresignificant than identifying with a territory, culture or nation.
Q Some people see a national language as the primary indicator of one’s identity. What do you think should be the languages used and taught in the contexts of the Euroregional area to support cross-border cooperation, both in the public and private sectors?
A Personally I consider knowledge of a foreign language as an advantage. However, I am sceptical about obligatory foreign language learning. Nevertheless, for the Alps-Adriatic area the learning of the languages of this area should be encouraged and the necessary organisational opportunities (education, exchanges, etc.) created. I do not think that knowing a foreign language can negatively affect one’s identity. x