THE ORIGINS OF COMMUNITARIAN EUROPE (Teaching Guides 10 and 11)

 

Iosiv Dzugashvili AKA Stalin ¿The father of European integration?

I am sure you might be schoked if I say that without Stalin the European Union might have never existed. Of course it is a "boutade" (look at the meaning in a dictionary) for attracting your attention. But however it is not entirely false as in a great measure the alliance of the European States was a way of protecting each other against a most likely invasion  by the Red Army.  If finally the USSR only controlled Eastern Europe, it was because some Western European States decided to cooperate closely creating a Community of States, only three years after the beginning of the Cold War. Let's remember how did it happen. 

1. Europe at the beginning of the Cold War (1948)

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. 

 

A plane of the Berlin Airlift landing at Berlin Templehof

 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. 

The 16 German Ländern

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.

NATO's Flag 

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.t

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]

A World divided between the NATO (1949) and the Warsaw Pact (1955-1991)

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.  

Jean Monnet (1888-1979)

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.

Robert Schuman (1866-1963)

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".

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.

The Schuman Declaration (Paris, 9 May 1950)

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 (1951)

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. 

The European Defence Community (1952) 

 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. 

Scene of the Dien Bien Phu Battle (March-May 1954)

 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 are the only way that Europe could prevent an open war with Russia or China. 

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 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 signing of the Treaties of Rome (25 March 1957)

 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. 

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. 

Charles de Gaulle (1890-1970) in one of his famous television speeches

 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 empty chair crisis

 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).  

De Gaulle at the balcony of Montreal's Town Hall (24 july 1967)

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.  

The EEC in 1990

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 as 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 12.       

German Poster for the 1st EP election (June 1979)

INSTRUCTIONS: First read the text included in your Materials (pages 260 to 267 FOR Teaching Guide 10 and 273 to 285 for Teaching Guide 11), before proceeding to answer the Concrete Questions, the Concepts and the General Questions.

Concerning the Basic Chronology (pages 268-269 for TG 10 and 286-288 for TG 11) you should get familiar with the following dates:

1949,

 23 May: Creation of the German Federal Republic.

 7 October: Creation of the German Democratic Republic. 

1950, 9 May: Schuman Declaration

1951: ECSC (Treaty of Paris). Europe of 6.

1952-1954: Failure of the EDC

1955, June: Messina Conference.

1957, 25 March : Treaties of Rome (EEC and EAEC)

1960 : EFTA

1965: Executive Merger Treaty.

1966: Luxembourg Compromise

1973, January 1st: First Enlargement of Communitarian Europe (UK, Ireland and Denmark). Europe of 9.

1975: Creation of the ERDF (Europe of Regions)

1979: First elections to the European Parliament.

1981. Second Enlargement: Greece joins Communitarian Europe. Europe of 10.

1985: 

14 June: Schengen Agreement 

28-29 June: The European Council adopts the European Flag

1986, January 1st: Third Enlargement: Spain and Portugal join an Europe of 12.

1987, 1st July : Single European Act enters into force amending the EEC.  

 TOPIC FOR DISCUSSION IN CLASS: Should Communitarian Europe remain essentially economic?

Please consider the following aspects:

1. Review what was the Monnet and Schuman approach in the Schuman Declaration. What was the spirit of it?

2. Take into consideration the failure of the European Defense Community, proposed initially by France and rejected by the same country.

3. Consider the De Gaulle’s reaction that led to the Luxembourg Compromise

4. Which was the political aim of the European Regional Development Fund?

5. Why was necessary the Single European Act?   

Robert Schumann and Jean Monnet, the two friends who created Communitarian Europe

THE FEDERAL MODEL

George Washington looking at the first US Flag 

 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 for guaranteeing a strong union. 

 This is why a stronger model of integration appeared at the end of the 18th century. It was created overseas, in a 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.

                                                                                                                                            The 13 American British colonies before 1776

 Created provisionally in 1777 for ensuring a united action in the military field of the 13 rebel colonies that were at war against England, The Articles of Confederation were not an efficient operational structure for times of peace. Something that the founders of the new nation found out soon, when they realized that not developping a stronger union could jeopardize the new Nation, as it could not stand against the two powerful monarchies standing at its borders: 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. It created a supra State over the 13 individual States with a common strong Executive: the President of the United States.  This is why the system was also called "Presidential"

1. 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'.

We have already seen in Teaching Guide 8 different ways in which independent territories : -kingdoms, states, cantons- agree to cooperate to get stronger. Under a same sovereign (Composite monarchies), signing an agreement of confederation like the Swiss Rutli Oath of 1291, or adopting a “treaty” of economic cooperation, as it was the case of the Zollverein, the 19th century German Customs Union. 

The Federal union goes a step further. 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 preexistent cooperating states. The federal model turned out to be 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.    

2. A Confederation of 13 States to fight the British. 

 We already know from Teaching Guide 4 how the British colonization of North America ended up founding 13 different colonies and how these, after the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776, got together 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.       

The first 13 united states (1783)      

 Once they won the War in 1783 this Agreement became the first US common Constitution as it was compulsory for the new 13 independent States. But it was a very weak legal bond, because every state kept its own constitution, government institutions and legal system. 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 Second Continental Congress voting independence on July 4, 1776

 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. 

 Daniel Shay, an angry farmer that had lost his property for not having been able to pay his mortgage, decided to rebel against Massachusetts government with other farmers that were in the same situation.  The anarchy resulting from the rebellion could not be prevented by the Congress under the regime of the Articles of Confederation. They had not a strong executive and did not have common taxes for raising an army. Finally the mess created by Shay had to be solved by the wealthy citizens of Massachusetts who paid from their pocket an army to reduce the rebels. 

A US newspaper includes a drawing of the repression of Shay's 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 that wanted to preserve at any cost the independence of the 13 States.  

3. 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 apossible attack coming 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 this "basic agreement" (Grundnorm) was 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 US Constitution

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. 

Diagram of the organisation of the US Federal State

Finally the US Constitution, after being approved in 1787 required a complex ratification process, that included the enactment of a Bill of Rights (1791) that became legal limits to the power of the new Federal state.  They ended up having constitutional value as they became 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). 

George Washington (1732-1799)

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 by giving back power to the States. 

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)

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 and did not share the antifederalist views of Jefferson. 

 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 was 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.  

John Marshall, the first US Chief Justice

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. 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.

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 and the moment arrived when the Free States outnumbered the Slave States. As the latter could not accept the sitution they decided to secede from the Union and create a new Union not as tight as the Federal, that was called The Confederation.

4. Preventing the dismantlement of the Federal Union through Civil War

The secession of the Southern Slave States was not accepted by the Northern Fee States and that led to 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.    

Map of the American Civil War (1861-1865)

 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. I would recommend two movies if you want to realize what all this meant: Lincoln (2012) from Steven Spielberg starring Daniel Day-Lewis

 And Free State Jones (2016) of Gary Ross starring Matthew McConaughey. Both impressive. 

 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. 

5. Copying the American Federal Union

 The important point for us Europeans is that, despite all these problems, the US are a World power because they have been able to consolidate a very useful legal tool: a strong Federal Union that is compatible with a considerable autonomy of its member states. Despite the difficulties of its consolidation, the American Federal State has become a very Powerful Union that in our days still has a determinant influence in the whole World. 

The last version (1960) of the official US Flag

13 stripes (the original 13 colonies) and 50 stars (the actual members states).  

 The Federal way has definitely worked in the American case, and this is why “plural states” all over the world have chosen the Federal model and the Presidential System to consolidate the union among its parts. This is why, besides the United States of America, the Federal Model was finally adopted by some important states as Mexico (since 1824), Argentina (since 1853), Canada (since 1867), Brazil (1889), Australia (since 1891), Germany (since 1949), the Republic of India (since 1950), or the Russian Federation (since 1991). 

It is not the case of Spain, a country that, as you know, come from a composite monarchy model, and has not achieved the unification of all its t-historical territories in a centralized model of state. Spain tried to become a Federal State in 1873, but it was failure. Since 1931 Spain tried a weird formula: a unitary state but highly decentralized in Autonomies. The Spanish Second Republic (1931-1939) was organized as a sort of decentralised model of state under the weird name of “Integral State”. At least after 1978 Constitutional Spain is officially dubbed the State of the Autonomies. Clearer but fstil far from being fully operational, as this ambiguous system does not prevent that in some “Autonomies” there are strong movements in favour of total independence: Namely the Bask Provinces and Catalonia.

The Spanish State of Autonomies

 The Federal Union in principle was not appropriate for European States. As they were far too powerful at the end of the 18th century and during the 19th century to even consider the possibility of getting together in a federal way. However, after the two disastrous World Wars of the first half of the 20th century that destroyed European States, European Governments started considering the possibility of adopting the Federal model, as a way of unite and get back the possibility of having some influence at the World level after 1945. 

6. A Federal option for a disunited Europe

Adopting the Federal model in Europe so far, however, has proven to be very difficult for several reasons: 1) European States had been independent for centuries, 2) they did not share the language, 3) they had a private history, and 4) they did not have common institutions. 

 Remember that after the signing of the Westphalia Treaty (1648), the Universal model (Roman Universalism) gave  way to a Europe of independent States that fought each other (from 1648 to 1945) to reach the supremacy in the Old continent. And after the French Revolution and the appearance of the nation-state, "patriotism" and "nationalism" made things far more difficult. This is why, as you have seen in Teaching Guide 5, all along the 19th century European Nation-States were extremely keen in keeping intact their sovereignty in the context of the Colonial expansion. A situation that brought the Armed Peace, and, finally, World War I, the disaster of the Versailles Treaty (1919), World War II and the disappearance of Europe as a World power. 

  The Europe of the Versailles Treaty (1919)

 Only when Europe was in ruins in 1918, some eminent figures started considering that European States they should get together in order to form a powerful union at the world level to confront the US and the USSR. 

Richard Coudenhove Kalergi (1894-1972)

 There were some theoretical approaches at integration, like the Pan-European Movement of Count Coudenhove Kalergi (1923) or the Briand’s proposal for a European Union (1929). But they failed due to the rising tensions of strong nationalisms, especially on the part of Italy and Germany. Hitler's Lebensraum led to another European suicide: World War Two.

Aristides Briand (1862-1932)

It is interesting however that even between 1939 and 1945 each side tried to reinforce some kind of union of States to get stronger. On the allies side we have to mention the short attempt for a Franco-British Union (June 1940) tried by De Gaulle and Churchill. 

The Franco-British Union of 1940

On the Hitler's side the Third Reich tried to create a United Europe under the banner of National-Socialism creating a network of Vassal States. 

Hitlerian Europe

As a reaction there was also a anti-hitlerian Europe with different initiatives to develop a way for European integration. The most effective one was the customs and economic union created by Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxemburg: the BENELUX (5 September 1944).     

                                                             

After the end of the war in the spring of 1945, followed some years of disarray for Europe. A period in which the destroyed European States were initially obliged to ask Americans for money in order to survive. First in total disorder creating a Dollar gap, and, finally, in 1947, thanks to the initiative  Truman's Secretary of State, George Marshall they got a coordinated aid. 

George C. Marshall (1880-1959)

 You already have heard about the Marshall Plan. But let me underline that it was a great idea. Not only because of the money, but because it obliged the needing European States to work together if they wanted to receive any American aid for reconstruction. The Marshall Plan could be considered from this perspective the first step towards a united Europe after World War II. 

President Truman signing the Marshall Plan

 The success of the Marshall Plan gave way to the first real attempt of creating an integrated Europe. I am talking about the Congress of The Hague (may 1948), aimed at establishing a Federal Europe.  At the end it was a failure, but at least it enabled the foundation of the Council of Europe (1949), with its extremely useful Human Rights Court that from Strasbourg protect Europeans citizens from the abuses of their respective governments. 

One of the sessions of the Hague Congress (7-10 May 1948)

 Nevertheless it was clear that in 1949 the World belonged to the Americans and the Russians. If Europeans wanted to survive they had to get together. But once discarded the federal model, they had to find their own way: the Communitarian Method. And this is what we are going to see in the three last Teaching Guides of the present course 

INSTRUCTIONS: First read the text included in your Materials (pages 211 to 252), before proceeding to answer the Concrete Questions, the Concepts and the General Questions. 

Concerning the Basic Chronology (pages 253-254) You should get familiar with all the dates. 

TOPIC FOR DISCUSSION IN CLASS: Would you like a Federal option for Europe? 

Please consider the following aspects: 

1. Understand the essence of the Federal model of State integration. Consider the differences with other models: Empire, Composite monarchies or Confederation.

2. Consider the US Federal approach. Why it appeared. Which were the main difficulties it faced for assuring its consolidation. How work the relationship between the States and the Federal State. 

3. How should European States proceed in order to move to a Federal Europe.  

Churchill speech at the Hague Congress