Page:ELO 1(1), 6–25. European public law after empires.pdf/3

8   Signe Rehling Larsen project of European integration and globalisation more broadly, the nation-state remains the most important political unit.

There are, therefore, significant differences between these two clusters of theories and narratives, most importantly whether the nation-state is ‘withering away’ (and whether that is something to be celebrated or not). Nevertheless, these theories all share the same underlying account of European history centred on the nation-state as the dominant, if not the only, form of political association. We must reject this story; not least because it ignores the significance of empire in European history.

The argument set out in this article is that European integration and EU law must be understood against the backdrop of the decline of the European empires and the transformation of the European public law order that underpinned them: Droit Public de l’Europe or Jus Publicum Europaeum. With the demise of the public law order of the European empires, European integration emerged as an integral part of a new European public law order in tandem with decolonisation. The post-World War II European public law order contained a new vision for domestic public law based on human dignity; a new form of European interstate relations based on the limitation of sovereignty; as well as a new relationship between Europe and the (former) colonial world importantly through the realisation of the project of ‘Eurafrica’. In this way, European integration emerged as part of the solution to the problem of ‘Europe’ in a world where Europe had been irrevocably deprived of its status as the only place of ‘civilisation’, and hence, sovereignty. European public law, both domestic constitutional law and the international law regulating interstate conduct between European states, has always been shaped by the ‘colonial encounter’ with societies outside Europe. If we are to understand the nature and significance of European integration and EU law, we must start thinking about the legacy of empire in the history of European public law.

2. The legacy of empire

The mainstream narrative about the origins of European integration takes its point of departure in a flawed, or at least incomplete, diagnosis of World War II as a purely ‘nationalist’ war. By focusing on the ‘excesses’ of (German) nationalism, it is obscured that the territorial expansion of Nazi Germany into Eastern Europe in a quest for Lebensraum was an imperialist project and the techniques employed were honed from colonial practices previously employed outside Europe. The Third Reich was arguably the last ‘grand’ attempt to preserve the old world of European empires that sought to substitute oversees colonies by imperial expansion within Europe itself and thereby ‘make the great spaces of Eastern Europe into Germany’s equivalent of the [British] Raj’.

The misrepresentation of World War Two is symptomatic of a broader tendency to ignore the legacy of empire and focus exclusively on the nation-state as the relevant unit of analysis. Notwithstanding the turn towards transnational history starting in the 1990s, the dominant European historical narratives, at least outside history departments, remain anchored in national history (eg, French, German and British history). Yet from a historical perspective, the dominant