The Schuman Declaration: the starting shot of Communitarian integration (Paris, 9 of May 1950)
1. Introduction
Compared to the megapopulated
giants of Asia, Europeans live in puny microstates. Looking at the demographic numbers, the European states
have no chance at asserting themselves in a globalized world of 8 billion
people if they insist upon acting alone. Hence, they must unite. But this is no
small feat, as governments, by their very nature, tend to fiercely resist
sacrificing national sovereignty. Thus, states often only come together
when their situation is so desperate that they run the risk of disappearing.
We have just seen in TG.9 how after the butchery of World
War 1, the once almighty European States that dominated the world in the 19th
century, kept on defending their puny sovereignties in the name of a
“nationalism” that would led them to the disaster of World War 2 in which
European Nation-States would be at the mercy of the two juggernauts that
thereafter, following F.D. Roosevelt opinion in Teheran, Yalta and Potsdam
Conferences, would dominate the world in the second half of the 20th
century: The United States and the Soviet Union.
We have already seen how painfully the European States
barely survived during the critical postwar years, in the 1945-1949 period. How
Americans and Russians decided the destiny of Germans and how, after
implementing the Marshall Plan they divided the European continent between East
and West separated by an Iron curtain, during the whole Cold War (1948-1989).
Only the European leaders understood that the best way for their states to
avoid this dismal fate of being worldly irrelevant was to ally with each other
in order to survive, and thrive, in the international arena.
The integration of different political units
in one stronger state was however nothing new in European and Western history.
Historically, there had been various modalities and formulas for multi-state
leagues and alliances, each having advantages and disadvantages. Let’s have a
quick overview of three of them: the Composite monarchy, the Confederation and
the Federal State.
Let’s start with
the Composite Monarchy.
2. The composite monarchy
The oldest
European model of integration was the Composite monarchy. This
occurs when a king becomes simultaneously the monarch of different
kingdoms, which does not mean however full unification as in Composite
monarchies every member kingdom originally keeps its own “constitutional”
status intact. And that means: their own political institutions (Assembly of
States), their own law and courts, and also, usually, their customs barrier
protection. To understand how a Composite Monarchy workslets analyze two
examples: The Spanish Monarchy and the United Kingdom.
a) The Spanish
Monarchy
Spain is not a
completely unified state because
historically, it was formed as a result of the Reconquest, that is
the fight against the Muslims to retrieve the peninsular territory. As it
lasted from 711 to 1492 the result was that the unity of the Visigothic kingdom
of Toledo disappeared, and was replaced by different kingdoms or territories
that were separate political units once.
From the
conquest of the Muslim kingdom of Granada in 1492 to the present Spain has been
formed by different kingdoms for such a long period of its history that the
actual 1978 Constitution has defined Spain as the “State of the Autonomies”,
territories with a very large self government. There are 17 as you can see
in the following map.
Concerning Spain
bear in mind that the Catholic Kings (1474-1504) did not integrate
Castile and Aragon. The Crown of Castile was a unified state and
the Crown of Aragon a Composite monarchy. Isabel (Queen of Castile)
and Fernando (King of Aragon) did not unify their Spanish domains.
And neither did
their grandson Carlos I (V). Castile was a fully integrated State and the Crown
of Aragon was not. This is why in the Catholic Composite Monarchy ended
being dominant. And the common language was Castilian. In Spain we speak
Castilian an not Catalan because of this. But the kingdoms of the Crown of
Aragon : Aragón Valencia, Mallorca and the Principate of Catalonia, remained
separated and not integrated during the 16th and 17th
centuries.
It was not until
the Spanish Succession War (1704-1715) that ended with
the defeat of Aragon, Valencia, Aragon and Mallorca that these
kingdoms were integrated and unified in Castile (Decretos de Nueva Planta).
Philip V as victorious king imposed on the defeated the unification. As Navarre
and the Basks provinces had not rebelled against Philip V, they could
keep their own separate constitutional and legal frame. At least until
the Carlists wars (1833-1876). Then the territories that had
rebelled against Elisabeth II got integrated in the Spanish State: Navarre
in 1841, and Alava, Guipúzcoa
and Vizcaya in 1876.
Spain was
more or less an integrated State in 1900.
Especially after 1833, when Javier de Burgos, a Minister of the Regent
Maria Cristina, Ferdinand VII’s widow, divided Spain in the provinces that
still today exist.
But the
tradition of the Composite monarchy did not disappear entirely and
Spain is not today a completely unified state as the independentists
movements of Catalonia and the Basq country shows. A part of these
Territories’s population want to secede from Spain, France and Italy and become
citizens of a new state: the Bask and the Catalan Republics.
The
conclusion is that the composite monarchy model as far as integration
is concerned was not fully operative, and this why Spain, unlike France, is not
a strong and unified state.
Another example of
a composite monarchy is the United Kingdom (integrating England, Wales,
Scotland and Northern Ireland) despite its name is not as fully integrated as
it seems. This is why, for instance in soccer international competitions
we have a national team for England and another for Wales, Scotland and
Northern Ireland, for instance. So far the Bask and Catalan soccer players play
with the Spanish national team.
b) The UK
Another interesting Composite monarchy is the UK. The center of the Monarchy, England, integrated Wales in the 16th century and Scotland in the 17th-18th centuries, forming the United Kingdom with the UNION JACK They also integrated Ireland from 1800 to 1922. And now it integrates as well Northern Ireland, as the Ireland Act of 1949 established that the region would not cease to be part of the United Kingdom without the consent of its own Parliament.
But the
union is not as solid as it appears. Ireland became in the 20th
century an independent State (with the exception of Northern
Ireland). Scotland has since 1998 its own Parliament
and its own government, and many Scottish want to be independent from the
UK, though the referendum of 2014 failed. Also in
1998 Northern Ireland, as a result of the Belfast
Agreement, intended to bring together the two communities (nationalists and
unionists), was created the Northern Ireland Assembly in Stormont
Belfast and a Northern Ireland Executive.
It is interesting
that Scotland and Northern Ireland citizens were not happy with the
Brexit as they preferred to “Bremain” in the EU. In fact the Northern
Irish are so unhappy with Brexit that they required a special customs status
concerning customs: the Northern Ireland Protocol or Backstop. In fact it means that despite Brexit Northern
Ireland is still in the Common European Market.
Again in the
case of the UK, the Composite monarchy system does not guarantee a strong
unified State. This is why some other models of integration appeared. One
of them is the Confederation of States. The best example is Switzerland, the
land of “cantons”.
3. The Swiss Confederation
The
Confederation formula is a stronger union than the Composite Monarchy. It was
the first system of integration in the United States, from 1777 to
1787, before the establishment of the Federal Union. Also during the American Civil War (1861-1865) the Southern
States seceded from the US Federal State (the Union) and formed a new
Confederation.
But the
idea of a Confederation is not American it appeared in Europe. And
more concretely in Switzerland The origins of the Swiss Confederation,
get back to the Rutli Oath in 1291 that initially
concerned only three cantons. Today 26 cantons are member states of the Swiss
Confederation (Confederatio Helvetica).
Switzerland as a Confederation received full international recognition in the Peace
of Westphalia (1648).
Nevertheless the
Confederation it is not a powerful way of integration. In fact it gives
an extremely decentralized model of integration. This is why in the
Helvetic Confederation the 26 cantons have more power than the
federal government in Bern. Even today. A Confederation is therefore also a
quite weak form of integration.
4. The Federal Model of integration: The North American Example
The three models of territorial integration we
analyzed in Teaching Guide 8: namely the Composite
monarchies, the Swiss Confederation and the German Customs Union (Zollverein)
were not efficient enough in order to guarantee a strong union.
This is why a stronger model of integration appeared at the end of the
18th century. It was created overseas in the brand new country called the United States. Recognized
internationally in 1783 in the Treaty of
Versailles, signed after the British Crown lost the Independence war,
the initial 13 colonies,
transformed in independent states, had only a loose bond: the Articles of Confederation.
Created provisionally in 1777 for ensuring a
united action in the military field of the 13 rebel colonies in the war against
England, it was not a good operational structure for times of peace. Soon
the founders of the new nation realized
that if they did not developed a stronger union they
would end up disappearing against two powerful monarchies: The Spanish Monarchy in the
South and the United Kingdom in
the North.
The Founding Fathers were very pragmatic and
this is why they came up with a new
type of bond: the Federal Union.
a)
Federalism: an effective way to enable different states to act together
Federalism comes from the
Latin word, foedus, meaning 'treaty', 'compact' or 'contract'.
Foedus comes itself from the word, fides, meaning
'trust'. The Federal union
goes a step further than the Confederation, as some independent states
decide to act together, and for strengthening their union, they decide to have
a common legal link; a Federal
constitution that creates a new State over the cooperating states. The federal model is a
very efficient way of making a really strong union.
All this seems a little
complicated and confusing in theory. But it becomes much simpler if we follow a
concrete historic example, concretely if we look at how appeared the first
modern Federal state: The United States of America.
b) A
Confederation of 13 States to fight the British.
The British colonization of North America that started in 1607 brought 13
different colonies. After
the Declaration of Independence
of July 4, 1776, the 13 colonies united to fight the British Crown. In order to lead war against their
common enemy the 13 different colonies agreed on signing in 1777 a
cooperation agreement: the Articles
of Confederation.
It only established a parallel duality of states. The only common institution that kept this
bunch of states together was the Continental Congress, a non permanent Assembly where the 13 States sent elective
representatives.
The problem was that the new
13 States only met in Congress when
they were in trouble, and even so, if they agreed on anything it was extremely difficult to implement the common decision as
they had not a common budget, nor a common executive to enforce the
agreement.
That Congress
was clearly not a very operative instrument for facing crisis was evident when
one of the new State Massachusetts had to face its own “revolution” in
1786: the Shay Rebellion.
The good news was that
the Shay Rebellion was a lousy
precedent that rendered the US Founding Fathers nervous and forced
them to lobby for reaching a stronger union creating a Federal bond. But
they had to overcome a strong opposition of the Anti-Federalists.
c)
The Federal Debate
George
Washington, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and some
other capital figures of the new US nation considered that the 13 Colonies could not
survive a major
crisis, especially if the British, the French or the Spanish –in
this time countries much more powerful than the United States- decided to
attack them. So they understood they
needed a tighter union to get stronger.
A big debate started between, on
one side those defending that states should remain completely
autonomous, and others that considered that disunited they
would not survive against the Big European Monarchies, and therefore they considered
the “Federal way” the best option for consolidating a more solid tie among the
confederate states. To make it short: they wanted a stronger union more operative that would ensure a
greater protection over internal anarchy situations like Shay’s rebellion or
external dangers from international powerful nations.
The federalists
considered that the only way to create a stronger and more permanent union was
to approve a new common constitution as
the "basic agreement" (Grundnorm)
necessary to create legally a brand new super state. Of course as many members
of the Continental Congress were very reluctant to accept a superior power over
the individual member states, the federal
union was limited only to certain areas expressly defined in the constitutional
text.
The Federal debate was
long and fierce as the representatives of some States did not want to give up
their full autonomy. But finally, adversaries reached a compromise that
was set in writing in a very short new common constitution (September 1787).
The new Union had a strong President elected by the States and a powerful Congress integrated
by a double legislature: one
representing the states (Senate)
and another one representing the citizens (House of Representatives). And then there was a US Supreme
Court that represented the Judicial power of the new Super State.
There was a very strict separation of powers in order to avoid the new Federal state being too
powerful and ensure that the new structure would be controlled by the
states integrated in it.
Finally the US Constitution,
was approved in 1787 and followed by a complex ratification process, that required the enactment of a Bill of Rights (1791), through which were given
constitutional value the first 10
amendments to the new Constitution. When all the 13 colonies got
finally into the Federal Union, they elected
as first President George
Washington (1789-1797).
The US Federal State was
however still not fully consolidated when the Anti-federalist Thomas
Jefferson was elected as the third US President in March 1801. Jefferson thought that the Federal Union had gone too far and was far too strong. So
he tried to weaken it.
But fortunately for the US
Federal Union, the former President John Adams (1797-1801) had put in office as Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, John
Marshall (1801-1835)
who was a convinced federalist.
So when Thomas Jefferson
tried to give back power to the states in detriment of the Federal Union, John
Marshall decided that he could not do so at the Legislative level because it
was a violation of the US
Constitution. Through the landmark decision of Marbury vs.
Madison (1803) Marshall established that the US Supreme Court was the top power in the
Federal State as it had the power of interpreting the US
Constitution. And no law from the Legislature or no decision from the US
President could in any case violate the constitution. Marshall invented what
technically is called: the Judicial Review principle that established the supremacy of the constitution
over politics. This strict application of the Rule of Law preserved
the Federal Union. Law is the best remedy against social disintegration.
But the Judicial Review was
not enough to consolidate the federal way, because states remained deeply divided about one crucial question: Slavery. Some States
(essentially in the South) relied economically on slaves of the big
plantations, while others (in the North) had small properties and a lot of
industry. Originally there was a balance
between Slave and Free States in the common federal institutions as the Missouri
Compromise (1820) established that new states could be
added only if was respected the balance
between slave and free states. But as the US kept on growing, were added
new territories and new states. The expansion of the Union from the 13 initial
States to the actual 50, was performed mainly through the legal instrument
called the Northwest Ordinance of July 1787, (implemented two
months before the approval of the US Constitution), because initially it was
provided for the lands situated in the Northwest Territory that includes the
actual states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota.
But at the end, as it was fully operational, was used to integrate most of the new 37 states to the Union.
d)
Preventing the dismantlement of the Federal Union through Civil War
The territorial enlargement of
the US was a long process that did not go without tensions, including a
devastating Civil War (1861-1865) between the Slave and the Free States. At the end, Lincoln won the war and the Federal
Union was preserved, but at what cost.
With the expansion it became more and more
complicated to keep this balance, and the moment arrived in which the Free states outnumbered the Southern Slave
states. The Latter decided then to "secede" and create a new Union
not as tight as the Federal: it was The Confederation.
The North and the
Federal States won and the US were saved as a strong country. Nevertheless the
causes that brought the US Civil War persist to a certain extent. Despite the
fact that Lincoln abolished slavery in some states Black people endure a difficult situation. The huge fight for civil rights that
Malcolm X, Angela Davies or Martin Luther King endured during the 1960’s
persist with movements like Black
Lives Matters.
And as far as the Federal
Government is concerned, there are still
today tensions between the Republicans that defend the independence of the
States and the Democrats who on the contrary are always willing to reinforce
the Federal power.
The Federal model worked in the US, and this
is why, as we have seen in TG9, some Europeans tried the Federal Way in the
Hague Congress of 1948. But it did not work, because old European States had
lived under very different conditions for a very long time, spoke different
languages and their respective nations had diverse cultural story. In order
to get together the European States had to find their own way (Sonderweg). And this way was the Communitarian method.
5. The origins
of the Communitarian Method
The failure of the Congress of The Hague (7-11 May 1948) seemed to end any hope about creating an integrated Europe. But the situation was unsustainable for European States because Stalin, as a reaction against the Marshall Plan broke with the Western allies of the USSR and rose the “Iron Curtain”, an expression of Churchill meaning that all Eastern Europe was under the occupation of the Red Army. The only exception was West Berlin occupied by American, British and French troops, though it was surrounded by territory under Soviet control. No wonder then that the Cold War started when Stalin ordered its troops to isolate West Berlin (Berlin Blockade) West Berliners did no surrender because from June 1948 to May 1949 the Western Allies supplied the besieged city by air (Berlin Airlift). American and British pilots conducted during this period more than 250.000 flights dropping food, medicines, fuel and anything West Berlin population needed. They started delivering 3,475 tons of supplies daily, but by the end of the blockade, the spring of 1949, the figure had risen to 12,941 tons.
5.1. Europe at the
beginning of the Cold War (1948)
As you can
imagine, after breaking with Stalin, the Governments of the European
Western States were afraid that the powerful Red Army that already occupied
Eastern Europe could move further West. So they needed to do something
to prevent a Russian invasion. In fact as you already know Westerner States did
two things.
a) At the
continental level they created a Western German State to ensure a defensive
frontier against the Red wave. The German Federal Republic created
the 23 May 1949, (just at the end of the Berlin Blockade). Of course, Stalin
decided to retaliate and responded 5 months later imposing the creation of
the German Democratic Republic (7 October 1949).
The Berlin
Wall would not be torn down until 9 November 1989. Almost three decades
of isolation for the West Berliners, though it was necessary to wait until the
"Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany (Vertrag über die abschließende Regelung in Bezug auf Deutschland) also known as the Two Plus Four Agreement (Zwei-plus-Vier-Vertrag) because it dealt with the reunification of the TWO Germanies, and
was accepted by the FOUR powers that had occupied German territory in May 1945.
Signed on 12 September 1990, it was effective since the 15 March 1991. Germany
had lacked of sovereignty for 46 years.
b) At the World
level they requested the aid of the US through a defensive alliance.
At the demand of
Europeans Governments who considered they could not defend themselves alone in
case of an attack from the Red Army, US and Canada agreed to constitute NATO
in 4 April 1949; a month before the creation of the West German State.
In fact the
creation of this Alliance had also further purposes: to
prevent war among the European States favouring European integration.
Fortunately, by then the United States had turned its back on its traditional
policy of diplomatic isolationism.
It is often
said that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was founded in response to the
threat posed by the Soviet Union. This is only partially true. In fact, the
Alliance’s creation was part of a broader effort to serve three
purposes: 1) deterring Soviet expansionism, 2) forbidding the revival of
nationalist militarism in Europe through a strong North American presence on
the continent, and 3) encouraging European political integration.
The aftermath of
World War II saw much of Europe devastated in a way that is
now difficult to envision. Approximately 36.5 million Europeans had died in the
conflict, 19 million of them civilians. Refugee camps and rationing dominated
daily life. In some areas, infant mortality rates were one in four. Millions of
orphans wandered the burnt-out shells of former metropolises. In the German
city of Hamburg alone, half a million people were homeless.
In addition, Communists aided by the Soviet Union were threatening elected governments across Europe. In February 1948, the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, with covert backing from the Soviet Union, overthrew the democratically elected government in that country. Then, in reaction to the democratic consolidation of West Germany, the Soviets blockaded Allied-controlled West Berlin in a bid to consolidate their hold on the German capital. The heroism of the Berlin Airlift provided future Allies with some solace, but privation remained a grave threat to freedom and stability.
... after much
discussion and debate, the North Atlantic Treaty was signed on 4 April, 1949.
In the Treaty’s renowned Article 5, the new Allies agreed “an
armed attack against one or more of them… shall be considered an attack against
them all” and that following such an attack, each Ally would take “such action
as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force” in response.
While the signing
of the North Atlantic Treaty had created Allies, it had not created a military
structure that could effectively coordinate their actions. This changed when
growing worries about Soviet intentions culminated in the Soviet detonation
of an atomic bomb in 1949 and in the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950. The
effect upon the Alliance was dramatic. NATO soon gained a consolidated
command structure with a military Headquarters … (Text extracted from the NATO web page) Reference: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/declassified_139339.htm [Last retrieved
April 2022]
5.2. European
integration as a priority
But the founding
of NATO and the creation of West Germany were short-term measures,
and there was a growing feeling in European Western States that they should
join their efforts to survive at the World Level between the two super
powers: the US and the USSR. The problem was how to do it as European
governments were not willing to give up the smallest bit of sovereignty of
their respective countries, as demonstrated the failure of the Hague
Congress.
Fortunately
European politicians did not pay any attention to a singular personality: Jean
Monnet (1888-1979) who was essentially a pragmatic business man that
had an essential role in World politics since World War 1, not only in Europe
but the US, as part of the Think Tank of President F. D. Roosevelt. He was, for
instance, determinant for the launching of the Marshall Plan under the Truman
Administration.
Monnet was fully
aware that nationalism of the European States made impossible to
consider a united supranational Europe. But protected by NATO alliance
and considering the success of the Marshall Plan, that for economic reasons
worked at the supranational level, as it was a collective deal were European
States accepted to submit for the purposes or reconstruction to a joint
action, he thought that if remaining in the economic field an
integration could be tried.
He was lucky to be
a good friend of an important French politician, Robert Schuman, and
that West Germany had as head of Government a lucid politician, Konrad
Adenauer, that was more than willing to have Germany accepted as an
equal by the other European Western States, in order to avoid the disaster
of the 1919 "Versailles Diktat".
5.3. The Schuman
Declaration of 9 May 1950.
Monnet and
Schuman agreed to launch a very modest first step towards European integration,
as it was apparently limited to the joint production of Coal and Steel. But if you
read carefully the brief Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950, you
will easily discover that the initiative had far more reaching consequences for
the six initial member states.
5.4. The first
European Community: the E.C.S.C.
The Treaty of
Paris (18 April 1951) founding the European Coal and Steel Community
(1952-2002) was not a constitution. It was a
contract, an agreement creating a six member States European
Community. Each of the signing states had their own constitution, legal system
and full independence and sovereignty, with a tiny exception: they gave
up control over the production of coal, iron and steel that depended
on a High Authority that imposed its decisions over the member states.
The European Coal
and Steel Community
5.5. The failure
of the European Defense Community
As the
Communitarian method had worked, the founding members of the ECSC decided to go
for another try. But what was the most urgent question that ECSC member States
faced? In the beginning of the cold war, with the mighty Stalin Army on its
borders, and despite of the creation of NATO it made a lot of sense to
create a European Defense Community (EDC). Proposed by the then French
Prime Minister René Pleven the Treaty establishing the new community was signed
on the 27 May 1952. However the Treaty was never effective as the French
National Assembly refused to ratify it on 30 August 1954 by a vote of
319 against 264.
Military
integration was by far a too sensitive matter, especially for the French in
1954, as France had suffered a severe defeat in the Dien Bien Phu
battle (13 March to 7 May 1954) that ended the Indochina War and the
French presence in this territory, actually Vietnam.
Even today, in a world of a growing tendency to a full scale war, with the Ukraine War started in February 2022, or the War in Gaza started in October 2024, with China menace of invasion of Taiwan, Europeans cannot agree in creating a Common Army. The 27 Member States of the EU are most unwilling to renounce to this essential part of their sovereignty: their national armies. So NATO and the US Army were the only way that Europe could prevent an open war with Russia or China. After the Second term of Trump only NATO could help, if the US do not withraw.
5.6. Staying away
from politics: getting back to the old idea of a European Customs Union.
Jean Monet
understood that the only possible way of getting together was through economy,
and this is why at the Messina Conference (June 1955) he came along with the old
idea of a Customs Union. Something that, as we already know
had a precedent in the Prussian Zollverein (1834).
The negotiations
result was the signature of the Treaty of Rome in March 1957, that
enabled to create two new European Communities, besides the ESCC: the European
Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy
Community (EAEC).
The EEC was
going to be the decisive step for initiating an effective integration. It was
such a success that only 3 years later of its creation, the UK, that had
refused initially to join the new European Customs Union, decided to retaliate
with the creation of their own Customs Union. The European Free Trade
Agreement (EFTA) including besides the United Kingdom: Finland,
Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Austria, Portugal and Switzerland.
5.7. European
integration slows down because of De Gaulle (1958-1969).
EFTA however
did not go as well as expected as proven by the fact that one year later (July
1961) the British Government asked to join the EEC. They would have to wait
however 13 years because they had the fierce opposition of the French
President Charles De Gaulle (1958-1969) who felt France had been
humiliated by Churchill in 1945.
The paradox
is that De Gaulle did not like very much the idea of European integration, as
he was a big supporter of the French "Grandeur" and
he was not willing to give up any substantial parcel of French sovereignty. European
integration was on its way but it had to slow down because De Gaulle
French nationalism. During the 10 years he was in power he permanently
vetoed the entry of the UK in the EEC. Let's say that after Brexit we
have to conclude that De Gaulle was absolutely right about the
fact that the British had nothing to do in an integrated Europe.
As De Gaulle
did no accept that France would be obliged by a Majority Vote he started what
was called the Empty Chair policy, meaning simply that France did
not attend the European Summits, in a way to block any possibility of reaching
agreements to take common decisions. The crisis was resolved through the
Luxembourg Compromise that established the principle of unanimity vote of
the Member States as the usual way of adopting decisions.
The other
important point that De Gaulle imposed in Communitarian Europe was that the
main decisions were personally adopted by the heads of State or Government.
This is the origin of the actual European Council, that directly
represent the member states in front of the Communitarian Executive (the
Commission).
In fact France under De Gaulle had its own
external policy namely concercing the cold war. In 1964 France recognizes the
Popular Republic of China, and in 1966 De Gaulle visit’s the USSR and signs
some important Cooperation Agreements. On the other hand De Gaulle while
visiting the French speaking Canadian Province of Quebec pronounces on the 24
of July 1967 his famous speech in Montreal’s Town Hall that ends with the Cry
“Long live Free Quebec” (Vive le Québec
libre).
5.8. An enlarged
Communitarian Europe
De Gaulle’s gone
finally the European integration had a restart and new Member States
were admitted in successive enlargements. The UK, with Ireland and Danemark joined
Communitarian Europe in 1973. Since then many members state
have joined the EEC including Greece (1981), Spain and Portugal
(1986). After the creation in 1992 of the European Union, as a
result of the fall of the Berlin Walll and the disappearance of the USSR, many
more countries would integrate until reaching the actual number of 27.
At one point there were 28 Member States, but the UK left on the 31 January
2020, implementing the vote at the Brexit Referendum in
2016.
5.9. Towards a
closer European Union.
Before the decisive decade of the 1990's that saw the creation of the European Union there were substantial advances in the European integration. The first was the creation of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) in 1975.
Its purpose is to transfer money from richer regions (not countries), and invest it in the infrastructure and services of underdeveloped regions. pThis financial instrument had also a political aim: to reduce the protagonist of Member States and enhance the direct relationship of European regions with the integrated European authorities.
A second crucial step was the democratic election of a European Parliament since 1979.
In 1985 the Schengen
Treaty opened the way to the suppression of common frontiers and in
1986 the Common Market was relaunched through another Treaty: the
Single European Act. Three Years later, the Fall of the Berlin Wall
opened wide perspectives for a stronger integration. We will see its
consequences in Teaching Guide number 11.
6. How to study the Teaching Guide 10:
a) Read the corresponding text to T.G. 10 in the “Aula Virtual”.
b) Familiarize yourself with the following basic Chronology of the
period:
CHRONOLOGY OF TG 10:
1950, 9 May.
R. Schuman as France’s
Foreign Minister makes what was going to be known as the Schuman
Declaration. European integration (Community Method) process gets underway.
4 November. The European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is signed in Rome. It
enters into force in 1953. Spain joins in 1979.
1951, 18 April. Germany,
Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands sign the Treaty of
Paris, which constitutes the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC),
entering into force on 23 July 1952.
1952, 27 May. Signing of the European
Defense Community (EDC) Treaty.
1954 13 March to 7 May Dien Bien Phu. French defeat in
Indochina (Vietnam)
1954, 30 August. The
French National Assembly rejects the European Defense Community Treaty, signed
by the six on 27 May 1952.
1957, 25 March. The
six sign the Treaties of Rome, which constitutes the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM).
1958, 1 January. Belgium
inaugurates the rotating presidency of the European Community Council.
1st June Charles
de Gaulle named head of the French Government (Until 28 April 1969, 10
years and 10 months).
4 October Constitution of the Vth French Republic.
19 March. Creation
of the European Parliamentary Assembly (“European Parliament” since 1962) in Strasbourg, which replaces that
of the ECSC.
7 October. Establishment
in Luxembourg of the Court of
Justice of the European Communities, which replaces that of the ECSC.
1960, 4 January. Creation of the EFTA, an initiative of the U.K.
1961, 13 August. Construction of the Berlin Wall (Berlinermauer) begins.
1962, 27-30 March. The
European Parliamentary Assembly changes its name to the European Parliament.
1965, April. Executive Merger Treaty. Signing
in Brussels by the six member states of the three European Communities (ECSC,
EEC and EAEC-EURATOM). By virtue of
these agreements the Communities become subject to just one executive, a single
Commission and a single Council. It enters into force on 1 July 1967.
1966,
30 January. Luxembourg Compromise. After the “Empty Chair Crisis” (30 June 1965 to 30
January 1966) the Six Communitarian
Countries agree that unanimous votes (rather than by majority) shall be
required to make decisions affecting essential issues.
28 November. France vetoes the United Kingdom's
entry into the EEC.
1973, 1 January. First
Enlargement. Three new states
join the European Communities: Denmark,
Ireland and the United Kingdom.
This is the first expansion, creating the “Europe of the Nine.”
1975 Creation of the
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).
1979, 1
March. Entry into force of the
European Monetary System (EMS).
7-10 May. First elections to the
European Parliament by direct universal suffrage. This first democratic
Parliament is constituted on the following July 18.
1981, 1 January. Greece becomes the 10th member state of the European Communities.
1985, 12 June Spain signs the
treaty to join the European Communities.
14 June Signing of the Schengen Agreement on the elimination
of borders between EU countries.
Spain signs in 1991.
1986,
1 January Integration
of Spain and Portugal into the European Communities. The Europe of the 12
is born.
17 and 28 February. The Single
European Act is signed in Luxembourg and the Hague, amending the Treaty of
Rome. It enters into force on 1 July 1987
1989, 9 November Fall
of the Berlin Wall (Berlinermauer).
1990,
12 September Two plus Four Agreement (“Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany” (Vertrag über die abschließende Regelung in Bezug auf Deutschland).
3 October German Reunification (Deutsche Wiedervereinigung).
1991, 8 December Belavezha Treaty: Dissolution of the Soviet Union.
1992, 7 February Treaty on European Union, signed in Maastricht (NL).
1993, 1 November The Maastricht Treaty becomes effective.
c) Complete in your Class notebook the following exercises:
CONCEPTS
Composite monarchy/ Crown of Castile vs Crown of Aragon/ Decretos de Nueva Planta/ Union Jack/ The Troubles/ Confederatio Helvetica/ Cantons/ Rutli Oath/ Direct democracy/ Articles of Confederation (1777)/ Federal Union vs Confederation/ Shay Rebellion/ Federal debate/ Presidential system vs Parlamentarian system/ Bill of rights (1791)/ Constitutional Amendments/ Judicial Review/ Rule of Law/ Northwest Ordinance/ Missouri Compromise (1820)/ ″Compromise of 1877″/ Civil Rights Act (1964)/ Black Lives Matters/ Community Method of integration: Treaty vs Constitution/ Jean Monnet/ Robert Schuman/ Schuman Declaration/ ECSC/ EDC/ EAEC/ EEC/Treaties of Rome (1957)/ Executive Merger Treaty/ EFTA/ Luxembourg Compromise/ De Gaulle and the EUCO/ Enlargements of the European Communities/ ERDF/ Democratization of the Communitarian Method (1979)/ Schengen Agreement/Single European Act/ Two plus Four Agreement.
QUESTIONS
Concrete questions:
1. Why the union of the Crown of Castile and the Crown of Aragon
resulting from the marriage of the Spanish Catholic Kings ended up being a
Composite monarchy?
2. Why Philip V of Spain could unify his kingdom? Which was the cause of
it and how did he do it?
3. Why the United Kingdom is less integrated that the Spanish Monarchy
in terms of sports competitions?
4. Why the Brexit was a problem for Northern Ireland? How did the
British Government and the EU solve this problem?
5. Why is it difficult to know who is the Swiss President?
6. What is the main legal difference between a Confederation and a
Federal State?
7. Why was approved the US Bill of Rights in 1791? What was its
political aim?
8. What is the relationship between the Bill of Rights and the US
constitution?
9. Why the US Constitution favours school shootings like the one of
Columbine school in Colorado (1999), Virginia Tech (2007), Sand Hook
Elementaryu School in Coonecticut (2012), Parkland High School in Florida
(2018), or Uvalde School in Texas (2022)?
10. Why the US Supreme Court decision on the Marbury vs Madison case
(1803) was a landmark decision?
11. What was the cause of the US Civil War? Think o why the Southern
States seceded from the Federal Union creating a Confederate State?
12. Considering that the Secession of States is not formally forbidden
by the US Constitution, what legal argument used Lincoln for starting military
operation against the Southern rebel states?
13. Did the European States after 1945 ever try the integration through
the Federal Model?
14. Why the modest European Coal and Steel Community was so important as
far as European integration is concerned?
15. Why the European Defense Community was a failure?
16. How did the British reacted against the approval of the EEC?
17. Why Conrad Adenauer and the French Government accepted to start the
Communitarian integration process? Explain what advantages they got with this
model?
18. Which countries integrated initially Communitarian Europe and how
many countries joined from 1973 to 1986?
19. Why the European Regional Development Fund created in 1975 is such
an effective tool for European integration?
20. Why was created the European Union? Think of the circumstances of
Europe between 1989 and 1991?
General questions:
1. Why the United States
replaced the Articles of Confederation by a Federal Constitution?
2. How was reflected in the US
Federal constitution at the institutional level (mainly concerning the
Legislative and Executive powers) the Federal Debate between Federalists and
Anti federalist? In what sense they reached a compromise?
3. How did work the
enlargement of the United States through the Northwest ordinance for passing
from 13 to the actual 50 States? Which were the main difficulties this process
went through?
4. What is the relationship
between federalism and the protection of civil rights in the US? Who protects
better individual rights the states or the Federal state? Explain why.
5. Why the Community Method
(the European way of integration of states) is a step by step method? Think of
the Schuman Declaration.
6. Explain who were Jean
Monnet and Robert Schuman and why they were complementary for starting European
Integration through the Community Method?
7. How De Gaulle intervention
retarded the European integration process? Which were the two main consequences
of his anti-europeanism?
8. How was relaunched the
European integration process through the Communitarian method after De Gaulle
was out of power in 1969?
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario