ABSTRACT
Europe changed in November 1989. “It was a year of miracles,” as Sztompka (2008) put it. The Berlin Wall was dismantled. The Soviet sphere of influence collapsed, and was dissolved into 15 different states. Some of them stayed allied in a confederation, while others quickly established themselves as independent states, and deliberately reoriented towards the West. For Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – all of them independent in interwar times – the events of the late 1980s and early 1990s opened a window of opportunity. All of a sudden, it was possible to retreat from Soviet rule, proclaim independence, and establish or reestablish themselves as modern, Western states. The wheels of history started rolling in a new direction. It was also an event of great symbolic significance when these three states became full members of the European Union. In this book, we discuss how Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have adapted to and been embedded in a wider European and global environment. Especially, we will investigate how these three states have adjusted to the ideas and rules of the European Union. The focus is on changes in central state administration. Our concern with the Europeanization of the Baltic states will let us increase our knowledge of the transformation of states in general. To what extent and how can states be understood as scripted? How do states adjust to pressures from the European Union? How do they relate to other powerful rule-makers that are in the market of offering advice about what to do? What does it mean, and what does it take, to become a modern, European state? The legitimacy of states as political units rests partially on the assumption that citizens can influence the making of rules, or at least demand accountability from those responsible for making them. The higher echelons of a state – parliaments and governments – are often thought of as the ones that make the rules and ensure their implementation. Accordingly, states are often thought of as rule-makers, as controlled and coordinated from the top. This is the usual image of states, and sometimes it is also reasonably correct. However, views that assume such state autonomy face strong challenges. The image of states as controlling and coordinating entities has been questioned before, but today’s challenges connected with globalization and Europeanization are unprecedented and speak against excessively strong autonomy claims. How can we understand the modern predicament in which states largely have to adjust to rules produced by others?
