Request PDF on ResearchGate | Ever Closer Union: An Introduction to the EU or even pan-European bodies and institutions (Dinan ). The research described in this report was sponsored by the. United States Army, Contract No. MDAC ISBN: RAND is a nonprofit. Ever closer union? by: Dinan, Desmond, External-identifier: urn:acs6: evercloserunioni00dina:pdfe17fa6-eecaeb-.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Arabic|
|Genre:||Science & Research|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
facing the former Soviet Union and those in western industrialized nations, such as waiting 30 years for information about radioactive leaks, the dramatic rise. Ever Closer Union: An Introduction to European Integration, 4th Edition Desmond Dinan on acissymhalfmac.ga ebook with pdf FREE shipping on qualifying offers. DownloadDesmond dinan ever closer union pdf. The web browser is pretty good. C WINDOWS temp UPD13B. 12 33 -a-w- c programdata.
Early political cooperation This was for a long while less marked than cooperation in the military or economic field. It was hoped that integrating countries into a closer political community would eliminate the possibility of war between member states.
The Congress led to the establishment in of the Council of Europe. This served and continues to serve primarily as a forum for parliamentary opinion. Coming into force in , the Convention obliged members to respect and promote fundamental human rights and to recognise that individuals possess them under international law. The idea was that the consultative assembly of delegates from national parliaments of the Council would act as an embryonic European Parliament, but this did not prove to be the case.
Individuals such as Adenauer, De Gasperi, Monnet and Spaak of Belgium were keen that the initiative should work, but Britain was unwilling to allow it to assume any real power or influence. Early economic cooperation In the search for closer economic cooperation in Europe, both of the two broad approaches, intergovernmental and integrationist, were apparent. Monnet was keen to see step-by-step progress along the road to greater union. But on the other side of the debate were many statesmen notably in Britain who were 12 The European Union happy to think in terms of Europe drawing closer together but shrank from any binding commitment of the sort which he favoured.
In the governments of Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg had agreed on the desirability of forming a free-trade area between them; in July , an agreement on a customs union was also concluded.
Thereafter, they became known as the Benelux countries. The success of their venture encouraged further cooperation. What made it particularly significant was that this was an experiment in integration as opposed to the intergovernmentalism of some other initiatives. However, the first key developments in economic cooperation derived from the conception and implementation of the Marshall Plan for economic recovery.
The Marshall Plan At the end of the war, the economies of Europe were shattered and in ruins. The United States was the only Power with a strong economy. It supported the idea of European integration as a means of setting aside old rivalries, promoting prosperity and strengthening the ability of Western Europe to resist communism.
Its main instrument of policy was the Marshall Plan. Billions of dollars were committed to propping up the states of Western Europe, for although the aid was available to all countries on the continent the Eastern bloc was uninterested in becoming involved.
American motives were mixed. Altruism played a part, but so did self-interest.
In addition, there was a political motive, for Washington understood that hunger and deprivation made for popular discontent and disillusion with the democratic process. If aid could promote recovery, then there was less likelihood of Europeans being tempted by the communist ideas which were becoming entrenched in Eastern Europe.
The position of West Germany was especially crucial in this regard, for it was geographically adjacent to the Soviet bloc. It was easier to sell the idea of assisting German recovery and rehabilitation to Western governments if it was part of a wider programme of economic assistance.
These countries were helped by the economic boom in the United States, both in the rising demand for manufactured goods and because of heavy investment in European industry by private firms.
By the early fifties, the West European economies were beginning to recover, much helped by the assistance given by the United States through the Marshall Plan. The drive for European unity to 13 It had been necessary to create an organisation to supervise the administration of this relief.
This was a classic example of intergovernmental cooperation, valuable in itself, but quite distinct from the sort of mutual commitment favoured by the more enthusiastic federalists among European politicians. No surrender of national sovereignty was involved. But this suited those who preferred to think in terms of cooperation rather than integration. He was looking for a bold idea which would capture the imagination of internationalists in Western Europe. Although he was a visionary, he understood that the politicians and civil servants in his own country and other countries would only back his ideas if they were in line with their national interests and their postwar recovery programmes.
In his Memoirs,12 he later recalled why his fertile mind alighted on a plan for future coal and steel harmonisation: Coal and steel were at once the key to economic power, and the raw materials for forging the weapons of war. This double role gave them immense symbolic significance, now largely forgotten. To pool them across frontiers would reduce their malign prestige and turn them instead into a guarantee of peace.
Problems in the coal and steel industries In the late s, a crisis in the steel industries of Western European countries seemed likely, for there was the potential to produce vast quantities of the material. Europe appeared to be running into excess steel production. It was estimated that by production would be approximately 69m tons, and consumption plus exports only 61m — hence the danger of a cut-throat price war or some new international cartel to keep prices artificially high.
Monnet was aware that France had a clear interest in tackling the problem of excess capacity. He wanted to ensure that his country had access to German raw materials and European markets. The French foreign minister, Robert Schuman, was enthusiastic. Both men wanted to lay aside the age-old tensions between France and Germany, and joint action between the two countries would make this more likely. Such a scheme would have the advantage that although limited in its specific scale, it was bold in its implications.
Schuman was responsible for the political action needed to implement the initiative. With his backing, Monnet drew up proposals for a coal—steel pool in Western Europe. Instead of allowing the French and German governments to agree the development of the industries through negotiations and bargaining, the two men proposed the creation of a High Authority whose decisions would be binding on the two countries.
This was supranationalism in action, for it meant that in a limited sphere there was a cessation of national control. It was also a realistic step, the way for Europe to make progress. Though French prime minister Bidault was rather lukewarm about the Schuman Plan and showed little interest in its details, the approval given by the French cabinet on 9 May marked a turning point in the development of postwar Europe.
Schuman14 could go public and announce the scheme in a speech known as the Schuman Declaration.
Two aspects of his pronouncement stand out: 1. In the last paragraph quoted, there is even an implication that the two countries could initially act on their own. The pronouncement really marks the beginning of that Franco-German axis which has underpinned much of the development of the European Community, later Union.
Schuman implicitly recognised that there would not be any swift creation of a federal Europe with its own constitution. In other words, this was an acceptance of progress via functional means.
Gathering support From the beginning, Monnet and Schuman could see that the proposal would be better if more countries were involved, so that it was open to others to join. However, the Plan had matured in secrecy, and it was sprung upon the relevant nations in such a way as to cause maximum impact. This would achieve a The drive for European unity to 15 momentum, and get negotiations swiftly started on the right level of boldness and vision.
It provided him with the opportunity of rebuilding his fledgling state and giving the country enhanced respectability. Agreement on the principles between France and Germany was the essential starting point, the precondition for securing assent from Italy and the Benelux countries.
The French invited six countries to participate in discussions. They signed the Treaty of Paris in April The idea underlying the new Community was to establish a new body to manage all coal and steel production.
It began to operate in , a date which marks the foundation of serious economic union in Europe. Monnet18 was candid about his end goal. When the ECSC was formed, there was a choice of routes available. Europe could opt again for the intergovernmental approach in which national sovereignty was retained. Or it could instead take a significant new departure and over a limited area abandon any notion of national control and go for the supranational. It chose the latter. This meant that, whatever its broad sympathy, Britain was not likely to be content with the new arrangements.
Aftermath of the ECSC: a new defence community? It proposed the creation of a European army into which German units could be integrated. In many ways, the proposal was a logical development of the neofunctional approach, for it was an expansion of cooperation sector by sector. Indeed this was precisely what the British feared. British participation might have helped to persuade the French to go ahead but this was never on the cards.
Britain was prepared to work with an EDC, but not to participate in one. Churchill20 actually urged the Six to ratify the plan, and declared himself in favour of the immediate creation of a European army under a unified command. I recommend this book to those that dont have any idea about the EU. Would you like to tell us about a lower price? Open Preview See a Problem?
To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. Gordon rated it liked it Feb 08, The 4th edition is fully revised and updated to take account of major changes in the EU, including full coverage of the impact of the Lisbon Treaty. Aug 23, Aliya rated it it was amazing Shelves: This book more about the history and governmental structure of the EU.
Amazon Renewed Refurbished products with a warranty. Withoutabox Submit to Film Festivals. Interpretations or summaries of the readings are, for the most part, misguided. Different arguments are hardly considered. The paper has no 4 coherent structure, and writing is very problematic.
The paper hardly addresses anything relevant to the course. It seriously lacks understanding of the issues. Even in case of the final paper, there is little or no adequate textual evidence. Interpretations and summaries of the course readings are, for the most part, completely misguided.
The paper lacks a coherent conception or organization. Writing is awkward. D There is no thesis, there are no arguments, there is little or no evidence, there is no conception of writing, and no organization of the paper. Interpretations and summaries of course material are completely misguided. E The paper shows a complete lack of understanding of the subject and of academic writing.
Quotes and references are incorrect, there are significant errors in writing or in framing the paper; thesis, arguments, evidence are missing. There is no understanding of the course material and subject. Oxford: Oxford University Press, , pp. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, , pp.
John Peterson and Michael E. Greven 8 and Louis W.