The Role of the Czech Republic in Redefining Central European Identity within the European Union

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36690/2674-5216-2026-1-54-66

Keywords:

Czech Republic, Central Europe, European Union, regional identity, constructivism, European integration, identity politics, Visegrad Group, political discourse, historical memory, national sovereignty, normative socialization

Abstract

The post-Cold War transformation of Europe reactivated debates on the identity, political position, and historical belonging of Central European states within the broader European project. In this context, the Czech Republic emerged as an important actor in the reinterpretation of Central Europe, challenging its reduction to the category of Eastern Europe and promoting a more differentiated understanding of regional belonging within the European Union. The purpose of the study is to analyze how the Czech Republic has contributed to redefining Central European identity within the European Union and to determine the political, institutional, and discursive mechanisms through which this process has taken place. The study is based on a qualitative research design grounded in constructivist theory. The methodological approach combines documentary analysis and qualitative discourse analysis. The empirical basis includes official European Union documents, Czech foreign policy texts, strategic statements, and speeches by political elites. Analytical attention is focused on discursive identity construction, regional cooperation practices, the role of historical memory, and the interaction between national sovereignty and European integration. The findings demonstrate that the Czech Republic has played a multidimensional role in redefining Central European identity. First, Czech political discourse has emphasized the historical and cultural proximity of Central Europe to Western Europe, thereby resisting the homogenizing label of Eastern Europe. Second, the Czech Republic has promoted a complementary model of identity in which national, regional, and European affiliations coexist rather than compete. Third, within regional frameworks such as the Visegrad Group, the Czech Republic has often acted as a mediator, balancing regional interests with constructive engagement in EU institutions. The study also shows that historical memory, normative socialization, and debates on sovereignty have significantly shaped this identity reconfiguration. The Czech Republic has contributed to the emergence of a flexible, pluralistic, and institutionally embedded model of Central European identity within the European Union. Its role illustrates that regional identity in Europe is not fixed but continuously negotiated through discourse, institutional participation, and historical reinterpretation. Future studies may compare the Czech Republic with other Central European states in order to identify alternative models of regional identity construction and assess their implications for differentiated European integration.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Mohsen Zamani, University of Tehran

Ph.D. in Political Geography (Political Organization of Space), University of Tehran, Tehran

References

Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (2005). Power in international politics. International Organization, 59(1), 39–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818305050010

Buzan, B., & Wæver, O. (2003). Regions and powers: The structure of international security. Cambridge University Press. https://lnk.ua/V01DqeAfp

Checkel, J. T., & Katzenstein, P. J. (Eds.). (2009). European identity. Cambridge University Press. https://lnk.ua/7QGtN9eF7

Dangerfield, M. (2018). The Visegrad Group in the European Union: 2016 as a turning-point? Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(1), 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12290-016-0422-6

Haas, E. B. (1958). The uniting of Europe: Political, social, and economic forces, 1950–1957. Stanford University Press. https://lnk.ua/GM9LDb1ks

Hanley, S. (2012). Dynamics of new party formation in the Czech Republic 1996–2010: Looking for the origins of a “political earthquake”. East European Politics, 28(2), 119–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2012.669733

Hettne, B., & Söderbaum, F. (2000). Theorising the rise of regionness. New Political Economy, 5(3), 457–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/713687778

Innes, A. (2001). Czechoslovakia: The short goodbye. Yale University Press. https://lnk.ua/RsZqw0O9v

Kundera, M. (1984, April 26). The tragedy of Central Europe. The New York Review of Books. https://lnk.ua/VVhICyXy8

Moravcsik, A. (1998). The choice for Europe: Social purpose and state power from Messina to Maastricht. Cornell University Press. https://lnk.ua/mOGSMT5nk

Risse, T. (2010). A community of Europeans? Transnational identities and public spheres. Cornell University Press. https://lnk.ua/l2GrsD3TD

Rupnik, J. (2007). Is East-Central Europe backsliding? From democracy fatigue to populist backlash. Journal of Democracy, 18(4), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2007.a223242

Rupnik, J. (2007). Europe’s eastward enlargement. European Journal of Political Research, 46(3), 305–328.

Schimmelfennig, F., & Sedelmeier, U. (Eds.). (2005). The Europeanization of Central and Eastern Europe. Cornell University Press. https://lnk.ua/IiKwCuhXN

Vachudova, M. A. (2005). Europe undivided: Democracy, leverage, and integration after communism. Oxford University Press. https://lnk.ua/Ml9JhyfM1

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027764

Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612183

Zielonka, J. (2006). Europe as empire: The nature of the enlarged European Union. Oxford University Press. https://academic.oup.com/book/1631

Downloads

Published

2026-03-31

How to Cite

Zamani, M. (2026). The Role of the Czech Republic in Redefining Central European Identity within the European Union. Public Administration and Law Review, (1 (25), 54–66. https://doi.org/10.36690/2674-5216-2026-1-54-66

Issue

Section

CHAPTER 1. MODERN TRENDS IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION