The term ‘Euroscepticism’ is appearing with increasing frequency in a range of media, political, and academic discourse. Yet, both in recent discussion concerning the drafting of a European Constitution and more generally, the label is being applied to a wide range of very different phenomena. While ‘Euroscepticism’ initially attached itself to British doubts about the country’s place in a Continental project for economic and political union, the transplantation of the term to the Continent has seen it acquire new, and occasionally contradictory, meanings. Certainly, much ‘Eurosceptic’ discourse in current or future EU member states can be seen as a manifestation of a ‘populist politics’- a rejection of ‘Europe’ as part of an overly cosy, mainstream governmental consensus. Yet, mainstream governmental parties themselves are increasingly giving voice to critical views on European-level policy and institutional developments. While this latter critical discourse is commonly labelled as ‘Eurosceptic’, it may, instead, be suggested that it represents an embryonic ‘federal politics’ – in which national parties seek to get to grips with the emerging reality of a complex system of multi-level governance.
Robert Harmsen is senior lecturer in European Studies in the School of Politics and International Studies of The Queen’s University of Belfast. His recent research has focused on the ‘Europeanisation’ of national political systems and on the development of the European human rights regime. Recent publications include: ‘The European Convention on Human Rights after Enlargement’. The International Journal of Human Rights 5, no. 4 (2001) and ‘Les limites de l’européanisation: les administrations nationales face à la construction européenne’. In Les métiers de l’Europe politique: Acteurs et professionalisation de l’Union européenne (2002).
