Civil Society and the Neighbourhood Policy: Creating Friends or Foes of Neo-liberal Bordering Practices?

Throughout the years, the support for civil society has been increasing popular been and become an integral part the EU’s neighbourhood policy (ENP) and Eastern Partnership (EaP). EU institutions themselves have developed a discourse on civil society and ‘partnership with civil society’. The paper examines how EU institutions have framed the concept civil society over time, and identifies competing conceptualizations of civil society in the ENP/EaP. It is shown that the EU’s discourse on civil society is pre-dominantly shaped by neo-liberal conceptualisations of civil society (civil society as functional participation/ associational life). At times, EU discourse suggests alternative conceptualisations of civil society as public sphere (area for contestation) or even as a site of progressive/ emancipated politics. The second part of the paper features two case studies: (i) EU cross-border cooperation (CBC) projects in EaP countries, and (ii) EU humanitarian work and support for civil society in conflict areas/ across conflict lines (conflict in Eastern Ukraine). The case studies illustrate the nuances in the EU’s discourse on civil society and its implications for the day-to-day practice of the neighbourhood policy. It is argued that CBC projects reinforce the notion of civil society as functional participation in practices of border control, whilst simultaneously allowing space for civil society as a force for emancipation engaged in the de-securitization and discoursive deconstruction of borders. In contrast, the EU’s conceptualization and practices in support of civil society in the Ukraine conflict exclusively reflect neo-liberal conflict resolution paradigms, which has resulted in the further marginalization of genuine local civil society actors in peace-building and reconciliation processes. By way of conclusion, the paper attempts to explain the conditions under which EU institutions are likely to allow more (or less) space for conceptualisations of civil society as public sphere or sites of progressive/ emancipated politics.