84
and democratic countries.” 278 This tendency can be observed in the Swedish foreign
policy discourse whenever it comes to the question of strategic interests and power
related bargaining on the international or global scene. This aspect is also closely related
to what could be seen as the most ironic similarity between Sweden and Finland. Even
though in recent years they have made very different politico-strategic choices, some
kind of strong and intrinsic belief that within the EU and Europe they are politically
‘different’, if not superior to the average res, is common to both of them.279
G. Councils, Associations, Unions, Leagues
There is a great bulk of studies dealing with the topic of ‘New’ Baltic Sea Regionalism
in various different contexts. Scholars from both inside and outside the region have
found very flowery descriptions for this phenomenon, pointing at the “myriads”280 of
cooperative undertakings that have “mushroomed”281 “in the name of the Baltic
world”.282 To various extents, they have highlighted the pivotal role of identity or the
newly emerging “we-feeling”, and tried to find explanations for the inherent dynamics
of the regional activism around the Baltic Sea.
I. Networks and Clusters
Given the complexity and amount of cooperative structures in the BSR, it is difficult to
overlook the variety of actors and contents that they build upon. Many exponents in this
tight network have very similar, if not identical, working agendas. When looking at the
objectives of the various associations and cooperative ventures it seems as if there was a
high potential of institutional and functional overlap. However, they differ in their way
of approaching a certain issue, and most often, they deploy different means for similar
objectives. Most importantly, they operate on diverse levels of action and thus, involve
different types of actors. This is what Hubel and Gänzle called “positive overlap”. i.e.
constructive division of labour in both functional and organisational terms instead of
mere duplication of efforts and working structures.283
278 ØSTERGÅRD Uffe: The Nordic Countries in the Baltic Region. In: JOENNIEMI Pertti (ed.): Neo-
Nationalism or Regionality: The Restructuring of Political Space around the Baltic Rim. Stockholm
1997, pp. 26-53 here p. 28.
279 For an extensive comparison between Sweden an Finland, including this aspect, see chapter
“Excursus: Mare Europaeum – Whose Mare Nostrum?”, p. 111-.
280 VON SYDOW Emily: Den Baltiska dimensionen. Stockholms geopolitiska roll i EU. In: EHRLING
Guy (ed.): Stockholm international. En antologi om Stockholm i en regionaliserad och globaliserad
värld. Stockholm 2000, pp. 23-36, here 23. Von Sydow defined the proliferation of regionalist
undertakings in the BSR as svindlande (Swed. vertigious) and added the humorous comment that
sometimes it appears as if not even the ministers responsible for these regional agendas “were in the
know” of what they are all about. See ibd. 26.
281 SCOTT James Wesley: Cross-border Governance in the Baltic Sea Region. In: ANDERSON
James/O’DOWD Liam/WILSON Thomas M. (eds): New Borders for a Changing Europe. Crossborder Cooperation and Governance. London 2002, pp. 135-153, here p. 135.
282 LEHTI Marko: Competing or Complementary Images. The North and the Baltic World from the
Historical Perspective. In: HAUKKALA Hiski (ed.): Dynamic Aspects of the Northern Dimension.
Turku 1999, pp. 1-28, here p. 23.
283 See HUBEL Helmut/GÄNZLE Stefan: The Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) as a Sub-
Regional Organisation for ‘soft security risk management’ in the North-East of Europe. Report to the
Presidency of the CBSS, 18 May 2001, p. 18.
85
Some of the associations in the BSR have built up formal or informal strategic
partnerships and link together in organisational clusters. The two major coordinating
hubs that stand at the centre of the two most important clusters are the CBSS for the
regional level, and the UBC for the sub-regional level. In its function as an umbrella
organisation, the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) tries to pool and link the
various associations in the BSR in various different ways. It has launched coordination
meetings to bring the heads of regional associations together as well as an Internet
Portal to provide a central point of reference for the distribution of information and the
promotion of the BSR working agenda to a broad audience. Most importantly, it has
established a network of strategic partners, aiming to provide a structured organisation,
and thus, to enhance coordination and harmonisation. It links together the BDF, the
BCCA, the BSSSC, the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference, the Baltic Sea Forum
(BSF) – Pro Baltica, the Baltic Sea NGO Forum, the Baltic Sea Trade Union Network
(BASTUN), HELCOM, Baltic 21, VASAB 2010, the UBC, and CPMR-BSC. Together
they officially refer to themselves as the “Baltic Sea Association” (BSA). In the subregional context, the Union of the Baltic Cities (UBC) plays a similar role. On the
initiative of A. Engström, then President of the UBC, in October 1997, the leaders of the
major sub-regional BSR associations decided to establish closer ties of cooperation and
coordination between the different formations. Besides the UBC, the organisations
clustering in this context are the BSSSC, CPMR–BSC, BDF, B7 Islands, and the Baltic
Sea Tourism Commission (BTC).284
Another virtual network that links formations on similar levels of action and with
similar institutional characteristics and a similar degree of formalisation can be found
between the three major scale councils in the Northern European sphere: The CBSS, the
Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC) and the Arctic Council (AC). Reut called the
group of three “the sub-regional engines of Northern Europe.”285 The CBSS, the BEAC
and the AC are very similar institutional constructs that cover a wider geographical area.
They have partially intersecting, albeit not clashing catchment areas. The overlapping
membership patterns with the AC, for instance, including all five Nordic states and
Russia, do not lead to conflicts of interest. These regional bodies promote common
values, harmonisation of regulatory frameworks and concerted operative action.
Another case in point for an organisational cluster in the BSR is the close cooperative
interrelation between the Nordic and Baltic Council of Ministers as well as between the
Nordic Council and the Baltic Assembly. Their cooperative relationship and their modes
of interaction will be subject to closer investigation in one of the following section of
this study.286
284 See UBC Bulletin, issue 3/1997, p. 2. Official UBC website www.ubc.net [30 November 2007].
285 REUT Oleg: Asymmetry of and in Dimensionalism. In: North Meets North Proceedings of the 1st
Northern Research Forum. Akureyri and Bessastaðir, 4-6 November 2000, pp. 174-178, here p. 174.
286 See chapter “Nordic-Baltic Co-operation”, p. 72-.
86
II. Patterns of Cooperation: Sorting out the Mess
Despite the proliferation of studies on Baltic Sea regionalism, there still is a clear lack
of contributions that would attempt to enumerate and interpret the wide array of
regionalist formations, coalitions, projects and initiatives in detail.287 While it would
definitely go beyond the scope of this study to trace back the development process of
each cooperative formation that emerged in the BSR after the end of the Cold War, it
seems useful to at least give an overview to illustrate the organisational and political
diversity at hand and to structure the array of organisations present in the region. 288
policy fields and working agenda
Name Y
ea
r
of
E
st
ab
lis
hm
en
t
G
ov
er
na
nc
e
m
od
el
T
yp
e
of
a
ct
or
s
O
rg
an
is
in
g
pr
in
ci
pl
e
In
st
it
ut
io
na
lis
at
io
n
E
nv
ir
on
m
en
t
B
us
in
es
s
T
ec
hn
ol
og
y
A
rt
a
nd
C
ul
tu
re
Sp
at
ia
l P
la
nn
in
g
D
eb
or
de
ri
ng
R
es
ea
rc
h
–
A
ca
de
m
ia
T
ou
ri
sm
M
ar
it
im
e
is
su
es
H
is
to
ry
t
oo
l
In
cl
us
iv
e
B
al
ti
cn
es
s
L
in
ka
ge
t
o
E
U
N
on
-E
U
m
em
be
rs
V
is
io
n
or
S
tr
at
eg
y
ACMBS 91 TNA NO SC M - - - + - - + + - - - NL TB S
Ars Baltica 91 TNW NO SC L - - - + - - - - - - + NL TB S
Baltic 21 96 EPJ all SC L + + + - + - + + + - - FL TB S
BaltMet 02 TNW SS LP L - + + - - + + + - - + FL TB V
BCF 94 TNW NO LP L - + - - - - - - - - - IL TB S
BDF 98 TNW all LP L - + - - - - + - - - + NL TB S
BEIDS 98 EPJ NO SC ? + - - - + + - - + - - FL TB S
BIF 94 ?289 all LP H + + + + + + + + + - - NL TB ?
BPO 91 TNA NO LP L - + + - - - - - + - - NL TB S
BRN 99 TNA NO LP L - + + - - - - - - - - NL TB S
BSC-CPMR 96 TNA SS IG M + + + - + - - - + - - FL TB290 S
BSF 92 TNA all LP L - + + + - - - - - - - IL N S
BSSSC 93 TNA SS IG H + - + + + + + + + - - FL TB S
CBSS 92 IGA OS IG H + - + + + - + + + - + FL TB S
CCB 90 TNA NO LP L + - - - - - - - + - - NL TB S
Helcom 74 IRE OS IG M + - - - - - - - + - - FL TB S
UBC 91 TNW SS IG M + + + + + + + + + + + FL TB V
VASAB 92 IGA all IG M - + - - + + - - - - - IL TB S
Table 9: Cooperative Structures and Formations in the BSR: Synoptic Overview
287 Deas provides one of the few positive exceptions in this regard. He tried to identify the structural
nature of various micro- and meso-regionalist formations all across Europe, thus offering a valuable
contribution to the conceptualisation of the type of regionalism prominent in the BSR. Some factors
applied in this chapter were inspired by Deas’ considerations about the nature of “Unusual
Regionalism”. See DEAS Iain: From a New Regionalism to an Unusual Regionalism? Mapping the
emergence of non-standard regional configurations in Europe. Manchester 2004. See also KERN
Christine/LÖFFELSEND Tina: Governance Beyond the Nation-State: Transnationalization and
Europeanization of the Baltic Sea Region. In: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Discussion
Paper SPS IV 2004-105. Berlin 2004.
288 Cases where a certain category is not applicable are marked with an ‘?’.
289 The BIF could be categorised as a self-standing institution that was established on the basis of a
Finnish domestic initiative.
290 Since 2004, most member states of the BSC-CPMR are also formal members of the EU (except
Norway). The BSC does not include Russia.
Chapter Preview
References
Zusammenfassung
Seit 1989 ist es im Ostseeraum zu einer explosionsartigen Entstehung einer Vielzahl von regionalen Initiativen und Zusammenschlüssen gekommen. Der Ostseeraum weist bis heute eine europaweit einzigartig hohe Konzentration an kooperativen regionalen Strukturen auf. Diese bilden gemeinsam ein enges Netzwerk von Vereinigungen, die unter dem Überbegriff der "Ostseezusammenarbeit’ interagieren.
Diese Studie analysiert die Hintergründe dieses regionalen Phänomens oder so genannten „Ostsee-Rätsels“ auf Basis eines Vergleichs zwischen den Regionalpolitiken zweier staatlicher Schlüsselakteure, Schweden und Finnland, wobei der europäische Integrationsprozess als übergeordneter Bezugsrahmen für die Untersuchung dient.