, Volume 52, Issue 2, pp 107–117 | Cite as

The Shatter Belt and the European Core - A Geopolitical Discussion on the Untypical Case of Slovenia

  • Anton Gosar


Europe in general is in a great state of change. States uniting with difficulty, states collapsing in pain, newly freed states struggling for new political, economic, and social identities - it is a region in a true transition. The paper is focussing primarily on the European Shatter Belt, formerly known as ‘Eastern Europe’. This is in fact a subset of new and old nation-states in the region of Central and Eastern Europe or, to use an older, but increasingly popular term, ‘Mitteleuropa’ (Ruppert, 1997). ‘Mitteleuropa’ is reemerging from the commotion resulting from the collapse of the old political order - communism. Our focus in this presentation is on personal experiences and observations. We will note the progress and positive dimensions of the change (transition) in the light of Europe's and NATO expansion. We will address the issues at two scales- at the international/national level and then, at the level of a Slovenian case study. This will enable us to discuss the ‘natural system’ of the process of enlargement and incorporate supporting material of geographical, historical and social nature as envisioned by Hartshorne. Since the collapse of communism, the region has experienced some serious traumas that vary in intensity across the region. Probably the greatest pain has been experienced in the former Yugoslavia - an estimated 150,000 have perished and about 2.5 millions have been displaced within and outside the country. Chaos still exists despite the ‘protectorate arrangement’ in Bosnia. The hot spot Kosovo has yet to be calmed down. In parts of the region economic pain has been considerable. Every state of ‘Mitteleuropa’ experienced absolute economic decline from 1990–1995; high inflation rates, increased economic inequality, high levels of poverty, increase of crime and more. Economic and psychological stress effect demographic processes. Things have partly changed to the better in the most recent years. The adoption of capitalism and a democratic political system has been painful, disorienting, and is still in progress. The democratization process varies considerably across the region and in some states is in jeopardy. Reformed communist parties had staged a ‘restoration’ in nearly all of the states - in some winning the control of the government, in others gaining strong and influential positions, or both. But, two major processes promise future democracy, rule of law, wealth and stability in general. This is the decision of the member states of the European Union and NATO to incorporate some/several states of the Shatter Belt into their own zone of protection and/or federation. Nation-states of the region tend to follow the EU Agenda 2000 rules with Slovenia one of the first!

transition democracy Slovenia NATO/EU enlargement Mitteleuropa Central/Eastern Europe 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Boesler K.-A., 1997: Neue Ansätze der Politischen Geographie und Geopolitik. Erdkunde 51: 309–317.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brunn S., Cottle C., 1997: Small States and Cyberboosterism. Geograph. Rev. 87(2): 240–259.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Černe A., 1992: European Aspects of the Slovenian Transport System. Slowenien auf dem Weg in die Marktwirtschaft. Arbeitsmaterialien zur Raumordnung und Raumplanung 108: 24–29.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Drbohlav M. and Demko J., 1997: Progress in Transition in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union, pp. 14, SanMarcos, Tx., (print).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    FAZ - Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (2000): Die EU-Kandidaten. (Wed., 06.09.2000), pp. 12.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gosar A., 2000: Grenzüberschreitende Wanderungen am Fallbeispiel Slowenien, Der Donauraum: Erweiterung der Europäischen Union und Migration - mögliche Auswirkungen auf den österreichischen Arbeitsmarkt, (= IDM 1 / 2), pp. 46–57, Wien.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gosar A., 1996: Slovenian Responses to New Regional Development Opportunities. In: Hall D. and Danta D. (eds), Reconstructing the Balkans, A Geography of the New Southeast Europe, pp. 99–109, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gosar A., 1993: Nationalities of Slovenia-Changing Ethnic Structures in Central Europe. GeoJournal 30: 215–228.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gosar A., 2000: Slovenia. In: Hall D. and Danta D. (eds), Europe Goes East - EU enlargement, diversity and uncertainty, pp. 117–131, The Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Klemenčič M., 1996: Croatia Redivia. In: Carter F.W. and Norris H.T. (eds), The Changing Shape of the Balkans, pp. 119–131, The UCL Press, London.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Klemenčič0D; V. and Gosar A., 1994: The European Integration from the Slovenian View Point. In: Hadju Z. and Horvath Gy (eds), European Challenges and Hungarian Responses in Regional Policy, pp. 67–78, Centre for Regional Studies, Pecs.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maier J., 1986: Ausländische Investitionen und ihre Auswirkungen aus der Sicht der Regionalwissenschaften. Arbeitsmaterialien zur Raumordnung und Raumplanung 47: 1–7.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    New York Times, 1998: May 1, p. A10.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Neue Zuericher Zeitung, 1998: 29.3.1998, p. 4.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Plut D., 1998: Slovenija na križpotju - Slovenija na okoljskorazvojnem in povezovalnem križpotju Evrope, Mihelaž, p. 386, Ljubljana.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Puc I., 1998: Na mrtvi straži, in: Mladina 30, pp. 25–29, Ljubljana.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ravbar, M., Klemenčič V., 1993: Actual Problems of Regional Development. In: Hadju Z. and Gorvath Gy (eds), Slovenia, in: Development Strategies in the Alpine-Adriatic Region, pp. 143–165, Centre for Regional Studies, Pecs.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ruppert K., 1997: Transnationale Koopeartionsansätze-neue regionale Wirtschaftsräume. In: Poschwata J. (ed.), Experimentelle Geographie und Planung-Theorie, Management, Praxis, pp. 405–417, Universität Augsburg, Augsburg.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ruppert K., 1996: Ansätze zu einem Raumentwicklungskonzept der Europäischer Union. Mitteilungen des Arbeitskreises für Regionalforschung 26: 89–95.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ruppert K, 1997: Mitteleuropa, Annäherung an einen geographischen Begriff. Angewandte Sozialgeographie 37.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vrišer I., 1994: Eine wirtschaftsgeographische Ñberlegung über die mögichen Beziehungen der Nachfolgestaaten Jugoslawiens zur Europäischen Gemeinschaft. Südosteuropa Aktuell 18: 65–85.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    USA Today, 1998: March 26, p. 4A.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anton Gosar
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of GeographyUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations