ヨーロッパ辺境地域における地域文化の越境性と境界性

課題番号23530696

2011 年（平成 23）年度～2013（平成 25）年度）
科学研究費助成事業(学術研究助成基金助成金)(基盤研究(C))研究成果報告書

2013（平成 25）年 3 月
研究代表者 定松 文
研究分担者 小森宏美
百瀬亮二

目次

1. 研 究 の 概 要

1

2. Comparison of Periphery Regions and Nations in the EU

4

SADAMATSU Aya

3. Differentiation in the Understanding of“ Nation”

13

After the End of the Cold War
KOMORI Hirom

4. Disputes over the Introduction of Bilingualism in Vukovar
MOMOSE Ryoji

19

1. 研究の概要

本報告書は、2011（平成 23）年度～2013（平成 25）年度科学研究費助成事業(学術研究助成基金助成金)(基盤研究(C))「ヨーロッパ辺境地域における地域文化の越境性と境界性」（課題番号 23530696）の成果報告書である。
本研究ではヨーロッパの辺境地域を対象に、その場所でなければならない「固有性」と「特異性」の空間的実践、使用価値としての地域の空間表象、表象の空間という点から、地域文化の越境性と境界性を実証的に分析することを目的とした。
そして、2007-9 年度基盤研究 C「グローバル化における『地域』概念の変容－フランスの周辺地域の文化活動を事例に」においてフランス国内の地域において見られた文化の越境性と境界性が、ヨーロッパ域内においても再現性があるのかを検証する研究である。
まず、越境性については、グローバル化によって持ち込まれた諸基準や国際市場での競合は、言語やその他の地域文化活動にどの水準で、どのような階層の人々によって推進されているのかを検討する。近年、地域間交流や EU の各種会議、アドバイザー制度などによって、行政職員や研究者、NPO や文化活動家の交流は多くなり、そこでの知識と技術の共有化が進んでいる。これが各地域社会においてどのように再構造化されて組み込まれているのか考察した。
第二に境界性については、地域内外の人に消費される地域文化が、いかにグローバル化されたパッケージや表象や記号をまとっているとしても、なぜ他の地域文化との差異と独自性を再構築しながら保てるのかを検討する。地域特性や文化の固有性が、歴史的事象の再解釈によって、その地域社会にとって「固有である」と認識され、差異化されていくのか、他とも異なる「違い」の正当性を分析した。
第三に越境性―境界性の錯綜に関して、EU の辺境に位置するエストニア、スロヴェニ
ア、コルシカにおいて、ヨーロッパ的なるものを見出し、それを自らの伝統と関係させていく過程が EU 統合とともにあったと考えられる。そのヨーロッパ的なるものが EU 内の境界線を消す一方で、EU 外との境界性を際出せる機能を持っているとすれば、それはどのようなものなのか、そしてどの担い手によってヨーロッパ的なるものは見出され、再構築され、展開させられたのかを検討した。
分析に当たっては、アンリ・ルフェーブルの空間論の≪空間的実践≫＝社会諸関係の空間的編成、≪空間の表象≫と≪表象の空間≫＝社会空間の再構造化、M.ドセルトーの「文化の政治」、地域文化の担い手を分析するための「経済資本」「文化資本」「社会関係資本」の概念を援用した。年 2 回の研究会と 2 名以上で 1 回の現地調査を行い、対象地域において、地域文化活動家、知識人、そしてそれらの拠点を空間的実践、空間の表象、表象の空

１間という視点から現地視察と半構造化インタビューを実施した。

具体的な調査は以下のとおりである。
(1)ラトヴィア調査
2012 年 2 月 27 日―3 月 2 日

調査年月日

調査地と調査対象
・ラトヴィアリガ

市場、占領博物館、ユダヤ人博物館、統計情報センター

・ダウガウピルス（ヴェラルーシ国境近く

ロシア語話者の多い地域）

第六小学校

民族博物館

面接調査

社会学者

ダウガウピルス要塞

1名

ダウガウピルス

第六小学校教員 6 名(2)スロヴェニア、マケドニア調査
2013 年 2 月 27 日－3 月 8 日

調査年月日

調査地と調査対象
・スロヴェニア（リュブリヤーナ、ノヴァ・ゴリツァ）
現代史博物館、旧市街地、ノヴァ・ゴリツァ（分断博物館）
・マケドニア（スコピエ、テトヴォ）
・テトヴォ

民族博物館、アルバニア人居住区

・スコピエ

旧ユダヤ居住地区

ホロコースト博物館

面接調査
スロベニア
・Tanja Petrovic（Center for interdiｓciplinary Research in Scientific Research Center of the
Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts リュブリヤーナ大学）、・Dr. Aleš Gabrič

Institute of Contemporary History）

マケドニア
・Valentin Nesovski

EU インフォメーションセンター

・A.J. Arno van der Pas(OCSE Programme Co-ordinatior Inter-Ethnic Relations)(3)フランス・コルシカ調査
調査年月日

2014 年 2 月 7 日－2 月 14 日

調査地と調査対象
Palais Fesch-musée des Beaux-ArtsMusée Départemental Pascal PAOLI
CRDP：Centre Régional de Documentation Pédagogique de Corse
Home of Napoléon BonaparteMusée régional d'Anthropologie

２

面接調査
・Alain DI MEGLIO(Directeur des études a l'ESPE de Corse

ESPE: Ecole superieure duprofessoral et de l'education
・ Marion TRANNOY

Chef de service et Responsable du Musée de la Corse

Musée régional d'Anthropologie
・Jacque Thiers

Directeur de Center cultural Universite Corse

これらの調査から得た知見は以下のとおりである。領域が集合的紐帯を維持するため文化的意味を必要とする場合、それは不完全な領域にならざるを得ない。それは 2 重の意味
においてである。一つは、内部の要素から構成される集合的紐帯としての意味、たとえば歴史や伝統、英雄、言語といったものは、その空間と時間の狭間で人為的に構築されるものであり、本来異なる意味経験をもつ人々からなる集合に完全に共有されることはないか
らである。戦時など、脅威となる他者との対峙において一時的に意味が共有されたとしても、それが永続する保証はない。もう一つには外部との関係性は常に変化し、外部からの人の移動、モノ・カネの流動によって意味を変化させ、領域の境界性の濃淡そして境界の位置すら動かす可能性がある。こうした文脈において、どのような他者と対峙するのか、協働するのか、その時代によって領域は同一体であろうとするために選択し、政治的に集合的紐帯の意味－文化－を変化させるのである。
しかしながら、EU 統合にともなう規格・基準の統一や自由市場化の影響がそれぞれの文化の解釈にどれほど影響をもたらしているのか、この研究機関では検討が不十分であった。そこで、今回確認された知見を 2014(平成 26)-2016(平成 28)年度科学研究費助成事業(学術研究助成基金助成金)(基盤研究(C))｢ヨーロッパ辺境地域における文化の政治が表象する社会空間｣(課題番号:26380715)において EU の境界線上にある国・地域においてさらに検証を行う予定となっている。ルーマニア－モルドバ、ポルトガル－スペイン－モロッコ、エ
ストニア－ロシアの区域においてどのような差異化が行われて、越境性と境界性が表象されているのか現地調査から明らかにする予定である。
個別の報告については、調査対象者への公開を意識して英語で書いている。英語での執筆にあたり、ご助力をいただいた Nickels Cory さんには心から感謝を述べたい。

2014（平成 26）年 3 月
研究代表者

定松

文

３

2. Comparison of Periphery Regions and Nations in the EU
SADAMATSU Aya

1.

Introduction
The arguments of the second modern society and globality by U. Beck have beendeveloped in recent years, and several regional studies have examined the aspect that the
restructuring of regions has come more from globality than cultural uniqueness. The nation,
the region, the company, and the family made a comparatively closed society in terms of theredistribution of welfare in the first modern society, but with the increase and acceleration offlowing capital, products, and people, particularly since the collapse of the Soviet Union, they
have been put into globalization or Europeanization.
This study examines

the characteristics and transnational tendencies of national/regional

culture in European border nations or regions using the concepts of spatial practice toproduce/reproduce the national/regional specificity, and spatial representation as a value in use
in the global society.
Specifically, we adopt the following two points as a research theme. 1) What kind of
influence do European standards and competition in the international market have on language
and other national/regional cultural activities? 2) How can national/regional spatial
representations of culture maintain their originality even when placed in a globalized setting?
We try to consider how these areas, which are physically located on the boundary with Europe,
create a distance between their own nation/region and the EU and/or other large neighboringstates, and also the influence this has on cultural politics.
2.

Theory of Space and National /Regional Comparative Studies in Europe
The purpose of this study is to examine whether the findings from our study, Local

Culture Comparison in France 2007-2009 from the Sociological Viewpoint, have validity inminority language areas in other European nations/regions, and intends to analyze factors thatthese areas have in common and also how they maintain their own uniqueness. We also seek to
confirm the validity of two other studies done in regional/national areas.

The first uses thespace theory to examine the industrialization of local physical cultural objects, including thelandscape, and looks at other common aspects for interpreting the national/regional history.
The other comparative research focuses on the originality of each nation/region.

４

2-1)

National/Regional Space as Social Products
Henri Lefebvre said that the social space was a social product.

His idea is based on thenotion that there is a processing of nature, meaning people are kept away from natural space,
and that each society produces its own space.

The social space is composed of social

relations for reproduction, for example family, sex, generations, and of productive relations,which include division of labor, labor organizations, and social functions of social stratification.
Spatial practice has three leading concepts, which are, 1) the specific place and space
placement to guarantee continuity and unification, 2) representation of space which includes
productive relations and order, and 3) representation of space such as expressions in a complex
symbol system.
In this paper, we interpret these three concepts in the following way and use them in our
analysis. Spatial practice is perceived as concrete, physical space. Representation of space
originally meant virtual space where a symbolic act was developed, but the meaning has
expanded to include the space molded by art and buildings, cityscapes reconstructed becauseof sightseeing spots, and the recent storm of investment in financial capital and neoliberalism.
The representation of space is a diagram to capture the formation of a space integrally, and thesocial space is constructed by the interpretation of various agencies.
Although the concept called the analytic borderlands, an issue of new space as proposedby Saskia Sassen, needs to be examined, due to the limited research time for this study theconcept is not examined here.

Sassen indicates “This analytics construction of these

dynamics needs to accommodate both the national and the global as representing
spatio-temporal orders with considerable internal differentiation and growing mutual
imbrication. These internal differences may relate to each other in cumulative, conflictive,
neutral, or disjunctive modes, both internally and across the national-global divide” (Sassen
2006:380).

Sassen’s concept of analytic borderlands, which could appear in the results of thisstudy, is especially relevant for countries whose boundaries of social space change frequently.
2-2．National/Regional Comparative Studies in Europe
As a base to consider national and regional differences, some previous studies are
introduced. First, The Politics of Europeanization by Featherstone and Radaelli analyzes thedifferences in the political viewpoints of different states when they joined the EU.

The

researchers indicate the reason for each state’s difference is crucial both for our understandingof European integration and for the policy implications. This leads us to recognize that the EU
member states are not a monolith, but rather that they had different motivations for joining theEU, and they have transformed their national systems to function within the system of the EU.

５

Secondly, Linguistic Diversity in Europe presents a perspective of the European
multilingualism post-national era and examines language, identity, culture, state policy on
language and language planning, polyglottism and education, and language and economy inEurope along with relevant societal levels of organization (European, national, and regional
levels.)
The third study for reference is On Baltic Slovenia and Adriatic Lithuania by Norkus. He
provides an internationally comparative causal analysis of the variation in political andeconomic outcomes since the first decade of post-communist transformations using pluralpolitical economic indexes. The study presents national comparisons and current differencesby examining political systems and economic systems. In these case studies, Latvia isclassified as Weberien-Friedman capitalism (bureaucratic liberalism model, Baltic countries),
whereas Slovenia is listed as Weberien-Porter capitalism (bureaucratic adjustment market
economy model, Central Europe and Slovenia).
It is important in this study to consider the influence of global trends, but it is not
negligible to take into consideration politically comparative points of view. Each state andregion as a political agency chose their system taking into consideration their own industrial
condition in relation to globalization and entering the market economy. These situations led us
to examine national/regional differences through further investigation, taking into
consideration the administrative backgrounds which created the differences.
3.

Research and Method
Our previous study, Local Culture Comparison in France 2007-2009 from theSociological Viewpoint, examined the concept of region as it has been used historically, andconducted research on the social movement of regional culture in Alsace and Corsica, socialchange in the intercultural area (tri-reggio), and the consumption of regional cultural symbols.
In order to consider the differences and commonalities of the representation of cultures inother European border areas, as well as in France, for this study we did research in four
countries over three years. In the interview investigation, we sent an investigation request anda questionnaire beforehand, and followed up with a semi-structured interview in the local
language or in English.
The following countries and areas, all European boundary areas, were chosen as places
for investigation: Latvia, Slovenia, Macedonia, and Corsica in France. Latvia was chosenbecause it has distinguished itself from Russia and gone in the direction of the EU, particularly
regarding the educational situation in Daugavpils where the number of Russian speakers ismore than the number of Latvians. Slovenia was the fastest to become independent from the６former Yugoslavia, is located in the cultural sphere of Austria-Hungary, and now gropes for an
independent economic way. Macedonia has not advanced towards becoming an EU member.
Corsica is seeking cultural promotion as a region in the EU. For these countries and regions
located on European borders, we examine how each one’s “Europeaness” might be discovered,and the process they are going through towards EU integration.
Although the aim of this study is to reconsider the social space and redefine the culturalsymbols of border regions that are swayed by large, economically powerful neighboring
countries, due to research time constraints a hypothesis on the redefinition of cultural symbols
could not be fully made.
3-1.

LatviaResearch Date

27th February― 2nd March, 2012

Research Place and Contact Person
Riga

World heritage city area, buildings and monuments of Soviet Union Era,

Market,Occupation Museum, Jewish museum, National Statistics Information Center
Daugavpils A city in southeastern Latvia that borders Belarus and Lithuania, Russian
speakers are the majority.
6th Elementary School, Fortress (currently in the application process to become a World
Heritage Site), Ethnology Museum
Interviews

Sociologist of the Latvian identity analysis
Six teachers and workers in Daugavpils 6th Elementary School

The Nazi occupation of the Soviet Union and the deportation of large numbers of people
are emphasized in school education and in museums as part of the nation’s history.

BecauseRiga was a strategic point of traffic during the occupation, space representation of the city andbuildings as an inheritance since the occupation of the Teutonic Knights has been developed.
Although the cityscape of Riga has been beautifully maintained, German and Swedish capital
have flowed in since Latvia’s independence and integration into the EU, and statistics show
increasing emigration because individuals cannot repay their loans.

In other words, this may

be a new type of forced moving caused by financial capitalism since Latvia changed toeconomic liberalism.
Latvia is working to expand its domestic manufacturing and transportation industries,
which were originally major industries but were just inferior in power among international
competition, and to find a market within the Russian economic zone. At the same time, Latvia
is making efforts to maintain its cultural originality by keeping Latvian as the only official

７language. The decision to make Latvian the only official language is, of course, to preserve theminority language but also to avoid complications arising out of Latvia’s position as a small
independent country between the EU and Russia. It is a space practice in a country whose
history includes having been occupied by a larger country, and that also experienced anincrease in radical politics and minor political parties during the period of economic stagnationand population outflow.
2-2.

Slovenia and Macedonia

Research Date

27th February― 8th March, 2013

Research Place and Contact Person
Ljubljana

Former city area, Muzej novejse zgodovine Slovenije (Slovenia national

Contemporary History Museum)Nova Gorica A town and a municipality in western Slovenia, on the border with Italy
Former border checkpoint, Division MuseumСкопје/Skopje in Macedonia
City area, market, former Judea residence district,
Holocaust MuseumТетово/Tetovo in Macedonia (a city in the northwestern part of Macedonia, near theborder with Kosovo, Albanians are a relative majority)
National Museum, Albanian township
Interviews
Slovenia

Historian at the Center for Interdisciplinary Research in the Scientific ResearchCenter of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Historian at the Institute of Contemporary History
Macedonia Representative of the EU Information Center
OCSE Programme Coordinator of Inter-Ethnic Relations
The difference in the backgrounds of Slovenia and Macedonia compared with that of
Latvia in 2012 can be considered as the following. While the countries of the former
Yugoslavia are socialist, Slovenia is different from other former Soviet Union countries in its
policies and rebuilding of its towns and culture in the sense that they don’t completely deny
the socialist era because the country has had an economic connection with Western countries
since the 1970s. Slovenia was also a cultural center in its historical connection with Central
Europe, and forms a representational space seeking affinity with Europe. The redevelopment８

of the town around the former city and sightseeing spots is regarded as a spatial practice.
What Slovenia and Macedonia share in common with Latvia is a weakened former mainindustry and increased unemployment that coincides with their integration into the EU, so they
are groping for reclamation of their manufacturing industry and striving to strengthen theirconnection with the former Yugoslavia nation in order to seek a market. The old socialist state
deepened the political opposition between all of the countries from the former Yugoslavia
nation during the democratization of the 1990s and the 2000s, but some of those countries
recognized the good parts of the socialist era after the economic crisis of the euro in 2009 andseemed to seek economic cooperation, while also reexamining their culture.
In this study, the investigation of Macedonia is of particular interest, because all of theother countries and areas we researched were in the EU.

Therefore, the results of ourresearch in Macedonia gave us the opportunity to examine the differences of countries insideand outside the EU.

Notably, the standards and structures of the EU, including infrastructures,

can actually create the border of the EU as a representation of space. Political systems,
differences in industry standards, and the existence or lack of infrastructure and networks withother cities, including roads and railroads, make a huge difference in the representation of
space. Latvia is situated in Northern Europe with a German finance and industry network,whereas Slovenia is in the Austrian economic zone and has a network with Italy. It might besaid that Macedonia could avoid a sort of economical colonization by the EU, but its economic
background is very weak. If the country strengthens its economic relationship with Turkey, it ispossible to distance itself from the EU, and the multicultural policy since Ohridski ramkoven
dogovoran has made the domestic cultural bonds more solid as one state.
3-3.

Corsica in France
Research Date

7th –13th

February,

2014

Research Place and Contact Person
Palais Fesch-Musée des Beaux-ArtsMusée Départemental Pascal Paoli
RDP：Centre Régional de Documentation Pédagogique de Corse
Home of Napoléon BonaparteMusée Régional d'Anthropologie
Interviews
Directeur des Etudes a l'ESPE de Corse

ESPE: Ecole Superieure du Professoral

et de l'Education
Chef de Service et Responsable du Musée de la Corse, Musée Régional

９

d'Anthropologie
Directeur de Centre Cultural

Universite Corse

Based on quantitative research about the language revival movement in the local cultural
revival period of the 1970s, and the linguistic education development period of the ‘80s and‘90s in Corsica, it shows that the language of Corsica was on its way to gaining status as an
official language. However, although the language is in a higher position than other regional
languages in France, the number of speakers has not increased sufficiently because it was not
an official language and was only taught as an elective subject in schools.
Although it is difficult to demand having a regional language made an official one inFrance, still the Corsicans keep a positive mindset and are working to accumulate informationon language rights and education within European regions, and continue to fight for the rightto have their language made official. Since the last survey in 2009, not only the original
Corsican textbooks, but also various teaching materials in Corsican have become available,
including CDs, DVDs and information on the Internet.

The Regional Museum prepares

exhibitions which examine the history of current social trends, studies the regional culture withthe aim of applying for world heritage registration, and is making progress in improving themuseum’s systematization and producing more refined, professional exhibits.

The display

contents are composed more of an accumulation of personal histories than a focus on regional
cultural unification, and they look at the situation from an outside point of view.

Themunicipal museum of Pascal Paoli, who was a leader of the independent government ofCorsica, is located in his native village, but the access is inconvenient. On the other hand, theNational Musee-de-la-Maison-Bonaparte has a multilingual guide, is advertised through fliers
and other means around the main town, and emphasizes not only French national history, butalso Corsica’s history. This seems to show that Corsica’s regional history is recognized by thecountry and is related to the region’s special political position.
4.

Conclusion
When a certain domain needs a reason for a collective bond, it cannot but be an

incomplete domain. There is a double meaning in this. On the one hand, cultural representation
as a collective bond that is comprised of an internal element, e.g., the history, a tradition, ahero, the language and so on, is constructed artificially in an interval of space and time, but is
not completely shared by the group of people who originally had the experience, or who had
the experience with a different meaning.

Even if the meaning, or cultural representation, was

１０shared temporarily by a group of people, for example during the time of war, there is no
guarantee that it will last long. On the other hand, relationships with the outside always change
and it is possible for a meaning, or cultural representation, to change based on the flow ofpeople or money from the outside. This may move the borderline of light and shade inside thedomain or even its boundary position. Various national/regional agencies choose and change
the meaning, the cultural representation, of politically collective bonds depending on the era
and whether they are collaborating with or confronting others in order to maintain the territoryunit.
In this research, three nations/regions, each performing a reinterpretation of their culture
while in the process of EU integration, were confirmed temporarily when they performed a
different cultural practice because of different political circumstances and economic survival
strategy. Cross-boundary spatial practices appear in the manner of conforming to EU standards,
applying for registration as a world heritage and/or sightseeing spot, or standardizing theresults and forms of migration and the market economy. The cultural practice of creatingcollective bonds to integrate a territory causes differences in cultural representation due to thestrength or weakness of the neighboring country’s power, the population scale, the mainindustry, the stability of the political system, the area’s history including occupation andliberation experiences, and the affinity with the EU system. The factors creating thedifferences among the nations/regions discussed here need to be examined further andcompared with other examples.

Bibliography
BECK,Ulrich., 1997, Was ist Globalisierrung?: irrtümer des globalismus-Antworten auf
Globalisierung, Suhrkamp Verlag.
BECK,Ulrich and Christoph Lau,

2005, “Second Modernity as a Research Agenda:

Theoretical and Empirical Explorations in the 'Meta-Change' of Modern Society” British
Journal of Sociology

56(4), 525-558.

FEATHERSTONE,Kevin.,and RADAELLI, Claudio M. 2003, The Politics of Europeanization,
OUP Oxford.
LEFEVRE,Henri., 1974

La production de l'espace, Paris, Anthropos.

NORKUS,Zenonas., 2012, On Baltic Slovenia and Adriatic Lithuania:A Qualitative
Comparative Analysis of Patterns in Post-Communist Transformation, CEU Press.
SADMATSU, Aya,.2014, “Politica of Culture and Social Space: A Case of Latvian Official
Language and Culture, Keisen University Kiyou 26, 157-175.

１１

SASSEN, Saskia., 2006, Territory, Authority, Rights: From Medieval to Global Assemblages
Princeton, Princeton University Press.
STUDER, Patrick and

WERLEN, Iwar.(eds), 2012,

Linguistic Diversity in Europe:

Current Trends and Discourses, De Gruyter Mouton.

１２

3. Differentiation in the Understanding of“Nation” After the End of the Cold War
KOMORI Hiromi

The concept of nation has been transforming since the end of the Cold war era, as former
socialist countries bring their own understanding of nation into Europe. Thus we are facing achange in the meaning of nation, the impact of which appears to be as big as what was causedby the emergence of the notion of national minority in the international society at the end ofWorld War I.
With the adoption of the Act of Hungarians Living in Neighboring Countries (the so-called
Hungarian Status Law) in 2001i, heated debates over the concept of nation occurred. This law
has had an impact not only in the political sphere, but also among the academic community.
The Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe adopted Recommendation 1735 (2006)ii,
the Concept of “Nation”, which acknowledges the variety of understandings of nation andencourages member states to take a more tolerant approach to the issues of relations between
states and national minorities, and also to take measures for the protection of the identity ofcultural and national minorities.
The above-mentioned change in understanding has its historical roots in the interwar
period, when national minorities sought to be recognized as part of a cultural nation regardlessof the state boundary. However, at that time, the international society did not see the positive
points in the idea itself or in the activities based on this idea, although limited cultural rights
were protected under the national minority protection regime of the League of Nations.
Additionally, in contrast to the interwar period, in the 21st century it is not the national
minority, but the state that takes the initiative.
In this research essay, I examine three laws, namely the constitutions of Hungary and
Macedonia, and the Law on Citizenship in Latvia. Here, my intention is not to compare thesethree, but to make a starting point for further study to clarify the possible outcomes based on atolerant approach to the issue of relations between states and national minorities, especially instates which consider the nation as both cultural and historical. .
1. Hungaryiii
In 2011, the political party “Fidesz”, the controlling party of the government, succeeded inamending the constitution (The Fundamental Law of Hungary, put into effect on 1 January,

１３

2012). It was controversial both in terms of its content and the procedure under which theamendments were made. However, here I have no intention of addressing the controversial
points, but rather will focus on the understanding of nation.
As mentioned before, the Status Law actually had the same intention as the 2011
constitution.

The aim of both legislative attempts was to differentiate the nation from thecitizens of the country. According to the preamble to the constitution, the Hungarian nation is
the historical and cultural nation which was torn apart in the storm of the last century.

Thismeans the Hungarian nation exists beyond the current state border of Hungary. At the sametime, nationalities living within the Hungarian nation form a part of the Hungarian politicalcommunity and a constituent part of Hungary.
What one needs to direct attention to is the differentiation between nation and nationality.
Although the equality between two groups is guaranteed, in terms of the relation to the state,
they are differentiated, or stratified. In other words, nationalities living in Hungary bear
responsibility for the future of the state, yet Hungary is the state for the Hungarian nation.
Comparing Hungary with Spain, the meaning of this differentiation becomes clearer. In
Spain’s constitution, there is also a distinction between nation and nationalities.

However,while a nation consists of nationalities (apart from the objections by the “nationalities” against
this understanding) in Spain, a nation is distinguished from nationalities in Hungary.
As for people from the Hungarian nation living outside their kin-state, the ties with their
kin-state are not just symbolic anymore, because the newly amended citizenship law of
Hungary allows them to possess dual citizenship.
2. Macedoniaiv
It is stressed in related literature that the 2001 amendment of the constitution of Macedonia
is the consequence of compromises. While the preamble to the constitution says that
Macedonia was established as a national state of the Macedonian peoplev, other nationalities
enjoy the same rights as Macedonian citizens. Actually, from the 2001 amendment, madewithin the framework of the Ohrid Agreement, one other nationality, the Albanians, were
provided with more than just equal rights. It can be said that this resulted in theinstitutionalization of bi-nationalism in Macedonia.
According to Amendment V, made to the constitution in 2001, any language spoken by atleast 20 percent of the population is also an official language in addition to Macedonian, andcan be written using its own alphabet (Macedonian is written in Cyrillic, whereas Albanianuses the Latin alphabet).

Also, any person living in a unit of local self-government in which

at least 20 percent of the population speaks an official language other than Macedonian may

１４use that official language to communicate with the regional office of the central government
which is responsible for that municipality.
Besides the institutionalization of bi-nationalism, the remarkable feature of the constitutionof Macedonia lies in the distinction between Macedonian people and other people who sharethe country. According to Amendment IV, made to the constitution in 2001, the citizens of the
Republic of Macedonia, the Macedonian people, as well as citizens living within its borders
who are part of the Albanian people, the Turkish people, the Vlach people, the Serbian people,
the Romany people, the Bosniak people and others taking responsibility for the present andfuture of their fatherland, ……are equal in rights and obligations towards the common good the Republic of Macedonia……. Here we consider the usage of the word “people” as almost
equal to cultural nation.
In contrast to the Hungarian constitution, the Macedonian constitution does not coversubjects living beyond the state boundary.

However, as with the Hungarian constitution,

there is an understanding that the nation/people exist regardless of the state border.
3. Latviavi
As for the constitution of Latvia, there is no distinction between nation and nationality,
which is different from the two above-mentioned cases.

Still we can recognize the same

trend in the amendment of the law on citizenship as in the other cases discussed in this paper.
In 2013, an amendment was made to the law on citizenship, which permits the possessionof dual citizenship under certain conditions.

According to the law, Latvian citizenship is an

enduring legal connection of a person with the State of Latvia.

The content of Latvian

citizenship is formed by the entirety of interrelated rights and obligations between a citizen andthe state. However this does not mean that there is no distinction among citizens. The law on
citizenship specifies a Latvian citizen as follows:
1) A person who was a Latvian citizen on 17 June, 1940, as well as a descendant of such
person.
2) A person who belongs to the constituent nation (Latvians) or autochthon population (Livs)
and fulfils certain conditions (such as knowledge of the Latvian language).
What is remarkable in the Latvian case is that Latvian citizenship is granted based on
historical experience and national belonging. This does not rule out the possibility for people
belonging to other nations to be granted Latvian citizenship. They can obtain citizenshipthrough the naturalization procedure required, but the opportunity of the possession of dual
citizenship is quite limited.
When comparing Latvia with the other two cases, it should be stressed that the aim of the

１５amendment of the law on citizenship in Latvia was also to include people who reside outside
the country as Latvian citizens. Section 1 of the law says that the purpose of this law is torecognize dual citizenship in compliance with the political objectives and interests of the Stateof Latvia and to retain the aggregate of the citizens of Latvia under increased mobility
conditions. Although the law uses the term “citizen”, we may consider it a nation or people,
because the core of citizens of Latvia consist of Latvians as the constituent nation(“valstsnācija” in Latvian, from the words “valsts,” meaning state, and “nācija,” meaning
nation).
In conclusion, based on findings within the framework of the JSPS research project(number 23530696; “Cross-border Influence and Local Uniqueness of Cultural Phenomena in
Frontiers of Europe”), I point out two questions to be clarified in further studies.

First, we should investigate the current situation to clarify whether the recent
understanding of nation beyond the state border, which is not only promoted by former
socialist countries, but also supported for improving diversity by European institutions, such as
the Parliament Assembly of Council of Europe, has had an actual impact on political,
economic and social relations among states and peoples’ everyday lives.
The Latvian case clearly shows that what has caused the transformation of theunderstanding of nation is European integration and peoples’ movement beyond the stateborder. Indeed, as the recommendation by the Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe
points out, the concept of nation varies because of the historical background and the social
structure of every state. However the interaction among European countries and peoples may
cause a wide-ranging transformation in former socialist countries, as well as in other European
countries moving in the same direction. At the same time we can see re-nationalization
processes in nation-states as countermeasures against the influx of immigrantsvii. Therefore theconsequences of convergences and competitions of various trends need to be investigated.
Secondly, we should also consider what would occur if a distinction was made between
nation and nationality in the cases of Hungary and Macedonia, and if the constituent nation
was distinguished from others in the case of Latvia. It should be stressed that both nationalities
and communities other than the constituent nation are guaranteed not only equal rights, butalso collective cultural and linguistic rights through the decentralization of power and thespecified school system viii . Under such circumstances, people belonging to thenation/constituent nation as well as people belonging to nationalities/communities other thanthe constituent nation seem to have become indifferent toward co-fatherlanders, while keeping
their emotional ties with the fatherland, in other words, the place where they live.

Here I

１６

emphasize that granting cultural and linguistic rights or even territorial autonomy to national
minorities does not necessarily produce social integration as a matter of courseix.
Multinational states, rather than the nation-state which emerged in the 19th century, has
become normative at least in Europe. However, federalism based on culture or ethnicity anddecentralization are not necessarily the omnipotent solution.

iConcerning the argument over the Hungarian Status Law, see Zoltán Kántor, Balázs

Majtényi, Osamu Ieda, Balázs Vizi, Iván Halász (eds.), The Hungarian Status Law: Nation
Building and/or Minority Protection, the Slavic Research Center, 2004.
ii

http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta06/EREC1735.htm(Retrieved 18 February, 2014)
iii

The official English translation of the Fundamental Law of Hungary, The special issue of

Hungarian Official Journal, http://www.kormany.hu/download/2/ab/30000/Alap_angol.pdf(Retrieved 18 February, 2014) .
iv

The official English translation of the Macedonian Constitution,

http://www.sobranie.mk/en/default-en.asp?ItemID=9F7452BF44EE814B8DB897C1858B71F
F(Retrieved 18 February, 2014)v“People” is a translation of the Macedonian word “народ” .

vi

The English translation of the Law on Citizenship of Latvia consolidated by the State

Language Center,
http://www.google.co.jp/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CGI
QFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vvc.gov.lv%2Fexport%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Fdocs%2F
LRTA%2FLikumi%2FCitizenship_Law.doc&ei=LPcCU9mzPMS2kAW5ioDYDg&usg=AFQ
jCNGm6hbyjhIn4sb5SXa0pC8iiMTzPw&bvm=bv.61535280,d.dGI(Referenced 18 February,2014).
vii

Nation-building is an ongoing process. Corsica and Latvia are facing similar problems, suchas how small nations can provide immigrants with incentives to learn the state language At thispoint, the Latvian language enjoys a more favorable position as the state language, and it isquite understandable that one of the interviewees emphasized the necessity of the official
status of the Corsican language.
viii

Both in Macedonia and Latvia the education system is divided based on language, which isusually evaluated positively as one of the practices of multiculturalism. However, the problem
of segregation exists, which is more serious in Macedonia than in Latvia.

１７

ix

In this respect I bear in mind the cases of Macedonia and Latvia. Most probably thisassumption does not fit the case of Corsica.

Social integration is not a priority for Corsica,

although immigrants occupy a significant part of the Corsican society and their inclusion is
also necessary.

There are several reasons for this difference. First, Macedonia and Latvia arestates, which demand loyalty from their citizens, especially because of the contentious
relations with their neighbouring countries/country. Second, the process in which Macedonia
and Latvia gained their independence is relevant here. Since Albanians in Macedonia andRussians in Latvia were citizens of a larger state, the emergence of the perception of belonging
to a new state takes time. Another problem is that Albanians and Russians are not satisfied
with their status of “national minority,” and their perception regarding the state where they live
is quite different from Macedonians and Latvians.

１８

4. Disputes over the Introduction of Bilingualism in Vukovar
MOMOSE Ryoji

In the year 2013, Croatia finally joined the European Union.
year for a lot of Croatian citizens.

That will be a memorable

However, for some Croats, especially those from Vukovar,that year will be remembered as a year of turbulence, because of a series of disputes over the
introduction of the Cyrillic alphabet into the official language of the municipality.
Vukovar is known internationally as one of the bloodiest battlefields in the Croatian civil
war of the 1990s, which has been called Domovinski rat in Croatian, meaning the War for the
The city was totally destroyed in the battle.

Fatherland.

When the city finally fell into thehands of the Yugoslav National Army in November of 1991, a large amount of Croat civilians
were killed and even more were deported from the city.

The battle in Vukovar, the city itself,

was presented as a symbol of the civil suffering of Croats, the brutality of the Serbs, and thetragic nature of the Croatian war.
After re-unification of Eastern Slavonia, including Vukovar, into Croatia, Vukovar was
declared a Hero City, and it has played an important role as a remembrance of the Croatiancivil war.

In the city, there are many Serbs, which make up one of the biggest national

minorities in Croatia.

To adjust to becoming a member of the EU, Croatia has been

improving the rights of minorities, including official use of minorities’ languages.

While therights of Serbs have been improved, some disputes have occurred in Croatian society,especially in Eastern Slavonia.

Vukovar is a typical example of how the introduction ofbilingualism, meaning the use of Serbian as an official language, could be controversial.
What changed the situation were the results of the 2011 census which were made public at theend of 2012.

The census figures showed that the number of Serbs in Vukovar amounted tomore than one third of the total number of Vukovar residents.

This meant that the Serb

minority satisfied the requirement to demand official use of their language.

The Croatiangovernment’s announcement that there was a possibility of the introduction of Cyrillic script,
which are the official letters of the Serbian language, provoked severe disputes and open
protests by Croat war veterans in Vukovar.

The Linguistic Rights of Minorities in Croatia

１９The constitution of the newly independent republic of Croatia was adopted in 1990, andhas been amended four times since then, guaranteeing rights for minorities.

There are few

mentions of national minorities in the original constitution, which only contains a generalcommentary about minorities in the Historical Foundation of the Constitution.

It states that“the Republic of Croatia is hereby established as the nation state of the Croatian nation and thestate of the members of its national minorities: Serbs, Czechs, Slovaks, Italians, Hungarians,
Jews, Germans, Austrians, Ukrainians, Rusyns, Bosniaks, Slovenians, Montenegrins,
Macedonians, Russians, Bulgarians, Poles, Roma, Romanians, Turks, Vlachs, Albanians andothers who are its citizens and who are guaranteed equality with citizens of Croatiannationality and the exercise of their national rights in compliance with the democratic norms of
the United Nations and the countries of the free world.”ix

This phrase, found in the firstversion of the constitution adopted in 1990, defines Serbs as one of the national minorities in
Croatia.
More details about national minorities and their rights are mentioned in Article 15:
Article 15
Equal rights for the members of all national minorities in the Republic of Croatia are
guaranteed. Equality and protection of the rights of national minorities shall be regulated by aconstitutional act to be enacted under the procedure stipulated for organic law.
Over and above general suffrage, the right of the members of national minorities to elect theirrepresentatives to the Croatian Parliament may be stipulated by law.
The freedom of the members of all national minorities to express their nationality, to use theirlanguage and script, and to exercise cultural autonomy shall be guaranteed.
While the part emphasized in italic font was added in the 2000 amendment, the other contentsof the article were not fundamentally changed except for a slight adjustment in description.
The process of guaranteeing minority rights has been advanced in a practical way by allowing
minorities to participate in political decision making.
Official languages are stipulated in Article 12, as one of the Basic Provisions of theConstitution:
Article 12
The Croatian language and the Latin script shall be in official use in the Republic of Croatia.
In individual local units, another language and Cyrillic or some other script may be introduced

２０in official use together with the Croatian language and Latin script under conditions specified
by law.
No other details of minority rights, including the official use of their languages, are stipulated
in the constitution.

In order to acquire more information about minority rights, it is necessary

to refer to related constitutional acts.
In December 2002, The Constitutional Act on National Minority Rights was promulgatedin a decision by the Croatian Parliament.

It stipulates language usage of national minorities

as follows:
Article 10
The members of national minorities shall have the right to freely use their language and script,
privately and in public, including the right to display signs, inscriptions and other informationin the language and script of their use, in compliance with law.
Article 12(1) Equality in the official use of a minority language and script shall be exercised in the
territory of a local self-government unit in which the members of a national minority compose
a minimum of one third of the population. (....)
According to the constitutional act, each minority group is able to offically use theirlanguage if they number one-third of the population, but the right has not been sufficiently
exercised.

The 2011 census says about 10% of the total population in Croatia has identified

themselves as non-Croats.

Some of them amount to one-third of the autonomous body where

they live, but few have enjoyed the right of using their language officially.
right in nine places, but have exercised it in only two places.

Czechs have the

As for Hungarians, they haveexercised the right in eight places out of 38, and for Serbs, in seven out of 21 places.

Onesuccessful example is the Italians, who mainly live in Istria and are the largest national
minority there.

They have exercised their right in 45 out of 47 places where Italians areallowed to use their language officiallyix.

It is likely that only the Italians have enjoyed the“minority right”.

Results of the 2011 Census and the Introduction of Cyrillic Script into Vukovar

２１

The beginning of a historical series of events can be traced back to the end of 2012, when
the results of the 2011 census were announced.

According to the census figures, while

79.17% of the population in the Vukovar-Srem municipality is made up of Croats, 15.50% are
Serbs, which represent the largest minority in the area.

As for the city of Vukovar alone, thedifference in numbers between the two groups is much smaller, with Croats making up 57.37%
of the population and Serbs representing 34.87%ix.
Based on the results of the census, the members of the Croatian government confirmedthat they would introduce the Serb Cyrillic script into Vukovar.

While Željko Sabo, themayor of Vukovar, proclaimed Serbs in Vukovar could claim the minority right regarding theuse of their language, right wing parties argued that the right should be suspended for at leastten more years.
The most vigorous opponents were war veterans’ associations, with the leading one being
the Headquarters for the Defense of Croat Vukovar (Stožer za obranu hrvatskog Vukovara,SZOHV), which was founded on the 10th of January, 2013.

According to its website, almost

all associations of war veterans in Vukovar joined it, and the purpose of the foundation was totake action against the introduction of Cyrillic letters into Vukovarix.

They organized large

scale demonstrations several times both in Vukovar and in Zagreb, the capital of Croatia.

In

reaction to the protests, political leaders only repeatedly responded that Croatia is a state that
follows the law, and therefore the laws should be implemented as soon as possible.
Despite the war veterans’ protests, bilingual plates with Latin and Cyrillic script were
finally set on administration buildings in Vukovar on the 2nd of September, 2013ix.

Althoughthere had never been incidents during previous demonstrations, at the next protest there wasviolence, including destruction of some of the bilingual signs.

Ivo Josipović, the CroatianPresident, called for respect toward the Constitutional Acts and emphasized the accountability
and duty of all political parties to explain to citizens why it is important for Croatia to accept
bilingualismix.

War veterans associations pushed for a referendum on the issue, but theauthorities refused.

To this day, disputes over bilingualism remain unsolved.

Concluding Remarks
The disputes discussed above could create a major division in Croatian society, especiallybetween Croats and Serbs as a minority.

It may also prevent refugees from returning to their

homeland, which has been indicated as one of the problems Croatia will need to solve.
The events described above occurred due to two opposing demands being placed on the
Croatian government, one made by the European Union and the other made by the local people.

２２

EU standards are universal, so it can be assessed that the Croatian government has made aneffort to follow the standards and to implement the laws despite protests from its citizens.
the other hand, the government cannot easily ignore its citizens’ requests.

On

The people claimthat their wounds have not yet healed and it is too early to accept Cyrillic script in Vukovar,
which is an understandable opinion.

This issue could remain unsolved for the next several

years.
It is quite possible for similar clashes to occur in other places of former Yugoslavia wherebattles occurred with the Serbs during the 1990s and a Serb minority still lives now.

In orderto avoid more clashes in the future, the international community should more actively support
the Croatian government which has been trying to promote multiculturalism.

EU standards

can assist Western Balkan countries in establishing laws that enhance minority rights and fightagainst corruption and organized crime.

In the short term, however, the standards are likely

to provoke social friction in places where people still hold vivid memories of the war.

The

disputes in Vukovar can provide valuable lessons in the process of further accession ofWestern Balkan countries to the European Union.

２３

2014 年 3 月
発行責任者

定松

恵泉女学園大学

文(Sadamatsu Aya)
人間社会学部〒206-8586 多摩市南野 2-10-1
TEL 042-376-8561