DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Steps and Missteps in European Integration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Steps and Missteps in European Integration 1 Steps and missteps in European integration 18 April 1951: Paris Treaty establishes European Coal and Steel Commu- nity, effective for 50 years from 25 July 1952 (France, West Germany, Italy, Benelux) Postwar Europe: what to do about a German army? The idea of deindustrializing Germany and turning it into a pastoral nation never made much sense. Many of the traditional agricultural areas of Germany disappeared behind the Iron Curtain. The Korean War meant (a) the United States needed European, including German, industry to provide war materiel. (b) a European military contribution (in the event, NATO) was needed to provide a balance to Soviet military forces, given the much of the U.S. military was tied up on the Korean peninsula. But it was politically unacceptable to simply allow Germany to rearm (and there was much resistance within Germany to the prospect of rearma- ment). Thus a backdrop to European developments in the 1950s was the working out of arrangements to manage German rearmament in a way that assuaged the concerns of Germany’s European partners. October 1950: French Premier René Pleven proposed the establishment of a European Defense Community (EDC). ThePlevenPlanproposedthatGermantroopswouldserveunderthe authority of a European Defense Minister, who in turn would be responsible to the ECSC Assembly. The Pleven Plan was the origin of the European Defense Community treaty,signed7May1952inParis. The EDC Treaty differed in detail from the Pleven Plan. Instead of a European Defense Minister, the EDC Treaty called for a Council of Defense Ministers, an anticipation of the EU Council of Ministers. In terms of political infrastructure, the EDC Treaty would have estab- lished an ad hoc Assembly, to be followed by a democratically-elected per- manent assembly. 10 September 1952 (four months after signing of the EDC Treaty): the Luxembourg Resolution of the foreign ministers of the ECSC member states 1 calls on the ad hoc Assembly to develop plans for the permanent assembly provided for in the EDC Treaty. 10 March, 1953: ECSC Assembly adopts a draft European Political Treaty. It provided for Council of Ministers (as with the ECSC and later the EC) Executive Council (as the ECSC High Authority and the European Com- mission) Parliament: – Senate – appointed by national parliaments – People’s Chamber – directly elected (thiswastheoriginalformatoftheU.S.Congress; popular election of the U.S. Senate dates from 1914 and the 17th amendment to the U.S. constitution). Social-Economic Council: an advisory body representing consumer and producer organizations Court Eight years after the end of World War II, the stage was set for full-fledged European political integration. We now know that such political integration has yet to take place, 60 yearsaftertheendofWorldWarII. Germany ratified the EDC Treaty 9 days after it was adopted. France: (a) a change in government (there were 26 governments during the twelve years of the Fourth Republic). (b) some opposition to German rearmament on any terms. (c) some belief that political integration should come before military in- tegration. (d) some belief that political integration should include more than the ECSC member states. EDC Treaty rejected by the French Assembly on August 30, 1954. This killed the European Political Community as well. 2 Backtothedrawingboard Direct pursuit of political integration infeasible, return to the strategy of economic integration as a means of laying the groundwork for political inte- gration. 2 1-3 June 1955 Messina conference of foreign ministers; Messina resolu- tion establishes Intergovernmental Committee under direction of Paul-Henri Spaak to prepare framework for broader economic integration. April 1956: Spaak Report, basis for the Treaties of Rome March 25, 1957: Treaties of Rome signed, with effect from January 1, 1958, establishing – European Economic Community –Euratom December 21, 1958: Charles de Gaulle as the first President of France’s Fifth Republic French participation was in doubt. The idea of Euratom appealed to the French since it held out the prospect of European high-technology competi- tion with the United States. In the event, Euratom did not live up to this promise, but its presence in the package persuaded France to adopt the whole package. Article 1: Establishes the EEC. Article 2: “establishing a common market and progressively approximat- ing the economic policies of Member States” Article 8: The common market to be established during a transitional period of 12 years, divided into three subperiods of four years each. Article 3: (a)—(c): abolish barriers to trade in goods, services, labor with the Com- munity, establish common tariff with outside countries. (d) & (e): establish common agriculture & transport (f) “the institution of a system ensuring that competition in the common market is not distorted;” (i) “the creation of a European Social Fund in order to improve employ- ment opportunities for workers” (j) “establishment of a European Investment Bank to facilitate the eco- nomic expansion of the Community” Article 4; (institutions): Assembly [Parliament], Council, Commission, Court of Justice Article 13: Customs duties on imports . between Member States shall be progressively abolished . during the transitional period. Article 14(6): at least a 25 per cent reduction by the end of the first four-year stage, at least 50 per cent by the end of the second four-year stage, complete abolition after 12 years (which would have been 1970). Article 33: A similar timetable for elimination of quotas. 3 Article 40: Member States shall develop the common agricultural policy by degrees during the transitional period and shall bring it into force by the end of that period at the latest. Article 75: [To establish a common transport policy] the Council shall, acting unanimously until the end of the second stage and by a qualified majority thereafter, lay down, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Assembly: (a) common rules applicable to international transport to or from the territory of a Member State or passing across the territory of one or more Member States; Note that qualified majority voting is to come into effectattheendofthe second four-year stage, thus on January 1, 1966. Articles 85, 86, 92, now renumbered as Article 81: competition policy toward cooperative or joint action by firms Article 82: competition policy to conduct of dominant firms Article 87: control of state aid to business Article 119: [Social policy] Each Member State shall during the first stage ensure and subsequently maintain the application of the principle that men and women should receive equal pay for equal work. This Article was a partial response to the French desire to equalize “social charges,” meaning wages, a concern that persists to the present day with respect to the new Eastern European member states. Eventually the French came to accept the view that (Stirk, 1996, p. 144, quoting French Foreign Minister Pineau) “[the] equalization of living stan- dards and condition of work will be assured in time by the operation of the common market itself. ” Article125(1)[ThepurposesoftheEuropeanSocialFundinclude] (a) ensuring productive re-employment of workers by means of [vocational training and resettlement allowances]; Article 13): The task of the European Investment Bank shall be to con- tribute, by having recourse to the capital market and utilising its own re- sources, to the balanced and steady development of the common market in theinterestoftheCommunity.ForthispurposetheBankshall...grantloans and give guarantees which facilitate the financing of the following projects in all sectors of the economy: (a) projects for developing less developed regions; (b) projects for modernising or converting undertakings or for developing fresh activities called for by the progressive establishment of the common 4 market. (c) projects of common interest to several Member States. Article 200: budget provisions Original financing shares of the EC 6: Belgium 7.9 Germany 28.0 France 28.0 Italy 28.0 Luxembourg 0.2 Netherlands 7.9 Annual budget to be proposed by the Commission and approved by the Council. Article 201: the EEC may at some point have its own resources, as from the common tariff. The Commission will make proposals to this effect to the Council, which will consult with the Assembly [Parliament] and then take a decision. Stirk and Weigall (1999, p. 155): Intheevent,progresstowardsacustomsunionwasfasterthan had been planned in the EEC Treaty. The first step was taken on 1 January 1959, when tariffs between member states were cut by 10 per cent. The Commission . then proposed the accel- eration of further tariff cuts, which on 12 May 1960 the Council of Ministers agreed. By 1 July 1962 customs duties among the Six had been reduced by half and the third and final stage of the es- tablishment of free trade within the customs union was concluded in 1968, a year and a half before schedule. de Gaulle’s vision of the EEC was contained in the Fouchet Plan of No- vember 1961: it (Stirk and Weigall, 1999, p. 157) envisaged that major political decisions on foreign and defence policymatters...weretobetakenunanimouslybytheheads of government at state summit meetings. There would be a separate European Political Commission comprising officials of the foreign ministries of the Six, who would reside in Paris and coordinate agendas for meetings of foreign ministers and of the heads of state. 5 For de Gaulle, the EEC was to be a Europe of the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Spaak Committee
    The Spaak Committee Source: CVCE. European NAvigator. Étienne Deschamps. Copyright: (c) CVCE.EU by UNI.LU All rights of reproduction, of public communication, of adaptation, of distribution or of dissemination via Internet, internal network or any other means are strictly reserved in all countries. Consult the legal notice and the terms and conditions of use regarding this site. URL: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/the_spaak_committee-en-2c330a16-0797-4e30-9a6b- d3c6de5ada0e.html Last updated: 08/07/2016 1/2 The Spaak Committee From 9 July 1955 to 21 April 1956, a working party, composed of delegates from the six governments and chaired by the Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Paul-Henri Spaak, undertook the task of drawing up a report which would sketch the broad outline of a future European Economic Community (EEC) and a European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC). In October 1955, although it had participated in the first preparatory sessions, the United Kingdom decided to play no further part in the work of the Spaak Committee, whose chances of success it saw as slight and, at all events, not altogether desirable. The British opposed a customs union because they wanted to maintain their autonomy with regard to the setting of tariffs, protect their industries and maintain the privileged links that they enjoyed with their Commonwealth partners. Besides, Britain, which had had the atomic bomb since 1952 and was already financing nuclear research programmes with the United States and Canada, did not want to compromise that fruitful collaboration by associating itself with Euratom. The working party, whose meetings were also attended initially by representatives of the High Authority of the ECSC, drew up a Report of the Heads of Delegation to the Foreign Ministers, which served as the basis for negotiations during the conference of the six Ministers for Foreign Affairs, which was held in Venice on 29 and 30 May 1956.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Intergovernmental Cooperation in the European Process
    1 Article à paraître en janvier dans Challenge Europe, le magazine on-line du European Policy Center The Evolution of Intergovernmental Cooperation in the European process. The Luxemburg report, also known as the Davignon report, adopted by Foreign Ministers in October 1970 is a generally accepted departure point for intergovernmental cooperation among members of the European Community. It was the first time that the “Community method”, devised by Jean Monnet and consolidated by the treaty of Rome on the basis of texts prepared by the Spaak Committee, was deliberately discarded, in the field of foreign policy, in favour of the traditional methods of diplomatic consultation, in an exercise initially known as “political cooperation”. The significance of that initial step can only be understood by a flashback to the failure of the Fouchet negotiations in the spring of 1962. That negotiation, launched and largely dominated by General de Gaulle, had been understood by his partners as a deliberate attempt to subordinate the nascent European Community to an intergovernmental construction established in Paris, presumably dominated by France, and without any of the supranational procedures or institutions which had made Monnet’s proposals acceptable to the smaller countries. Its final failure was immediately perceived as a turning point, as a clear parting of the ways between the Gaullist concept of l’Europe des patries and the supranational concept developed in the fifties. It was moreover quite acrimonious: participants accusing each other of arrogant and irresponsible behaviour. In his memoirs Paul-Henri Spaak, who played a prominent role both as Belgian Foreign Minister and as foster father of the treaty of Rome, clearly puts the responsibility on the shoulders of Couve de Murville.
    [Show full text]
  • Training and Simulation
    Food for thought 05-2021 Training and Simulation Written by AN EXPERTISE FORUM CONTRIBUTING TO EUROPEAN CONTRIBUTING TO FORUM AN EXPERTISE SINCE 1953 ARMIES INTEROPERABILITY the Research team of Finabel European Army Interoperability Center This study was written under the guidance of the Swedish presidency, headed by MG Engelbrektson, Commander of the Swedish Army. Special thanks go out to all ex- perts providing their insights on the topic, including but not limited too: MAJ Ulrik Hansson-Mild, Mr Henrik Reimer, SSG Joel Gustafsson, Mr Per Hagman, Robert Wilsson, MAJ Björn Lahger and SGM Anders Jakobsson.This study was drawn up by the Research team of Finabel over the course of a few months, including: Cholpon Abdyraeva, Paolo d'Alesio, Florinda Artese, Yasmine Benchekroun, Antoine Decq, Luca Dilda, Enzo Falsanisi, Vlad Melnic, Oliver Noyan, Milan Storms, Nadine Azi- hane, Dermot Nolan under the guidance of Mr Mario Blokken, Director of the Per- manent Secretariat. This Food for Thought paper is a document that gives an initial reflection on the theme. The content is not reflecting the positions of the member states but consists of elements that can initiate and feed the discussions and analyses in the domain of the theme. All our studies are available on www.finabel.org TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 3 Data Utilisation, the Need for Standardisation and Obstacles 33 Cultural Interoperability 4 Introduction 33 Introduction 4 9. What is Data? 34 1. Exercises as Means to 10. Political Aspects: National Deter Opposition 5 Interests vs. Interoperability 34 2. Current Trends in SBT 13 11. Data Interoperability 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bank of the European Union (Sabine Tissot) the Authors Do Not Accept Responsibility for the 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 Translations
    The book is published and printed in Luxembourg by 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 15, rue du Commerce – L-1351 Luxembourg 3 (+352) 48 00 22 -1 5 (+352) 49 59 63 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 U [email protected] – www.ic.lu The history of the European Investment Bank cannot would thus mobilise capital to promote the cohesion be dissociated from that of the European project of the European area and modernise the economy. 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 The EIB yesterday and today itself or from the stages in its implementation. First These initial objectives have not been abandoned. (cover photographs) broached during the inter-war period, the idea of an 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 The Bank’s history symbolised by its institution for the financing of major infrastructure in However, today’s EIB is very different from that which 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 successive headquarters’ buildings: Europe resurfaced in 1949 at the time of reconstruction started operating in 1958. The Europe of Six has Mont des Arts in Brussels, and the Marshall Plan, when Maurice Petsche proposed become that of Twenty-Seven; the individual national 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 Place de Metz and Boulevard Konrad Adenauer the creation of a European investment bank to the economies have given way to the ‘single market’; there (West and East Buildings) in Luxembourg. Organisation for European Economic Cooperation. has been continuous technological progress, whether 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 • 1958-2008 in industry or financial services; and the concerns of The creation of the Bank was finalised during the European citizens have changed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Development of European Integration
    FACT SHEETS ON THE EUROPEAN UNION The historical development of European integration PE 618.969 1. The First Treaties.....................................................................................................3 2. Developments up to the Single European Act.........................................................6 3. The Maastricht and Amsterdam Treaties...............................................................10 4. The Treaty of Nice and the Convention on the Future of Europe..........................14 5. The Treaty of Lisbon..............................................................................................18 EN - 18/06/2018 ABOUT THE PUBLICATION This leaflet contains a compilation of Fact Sheets provided by Parliament’s Policy Departments and Economic Governance Support Unit on the relevant policy area. The Fact Sheets are updated regularly and published on the website of the European Parliament: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets ABOUT THE PUBLISHER Author of the publication: European Parliament Department responsible: Unit for Coordination of Editorial and Communication Activities E-mail: [email protected] Manuscript completed in June, 2018 © European Union, 2018 DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice
    [Show full text]
  • Luxembourg Compromise- Council of the European Community Ignores British At- Tempt to Exercise Implied Veto Power of Luxembourg Compromise
    RECENT DEVELOPMENTS EUROPEAN COMMUNITY-LUXEMBOURG COMPROMISE- COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY IGNORES BRITISH AT- TEMPT TO EXERCISE IMPLIED VETO POWER OF LUXEMBOURG COMPROMISE On May 18, 1982, the Council of the European Community adopted a proposal for a 10.4% farm price increase, disregarding an attempted British veto of the measure.' The British voted against the proposal primarily as a means of protesting the sepa- rate, unresolved issue of the United Kingdom's budget contribu- tion' to the European Community (EC). S The British claimed au- thority to exercise de facto veto power under the Luxembourg Compromise,4 a seventeen year-old joint statement on EC Council See 15 BULL. EUR. COMM. (No. 5) 7-9 (1982). See The Day Britain'sBluff Was Called, ECONOMIST, May 22, 1982, at 77 [hereinafter cited as ECONOMIST]. Disagreement over the United Kingdom's budget contribution to the EC has been a perennial problem from the time the United Kingdom joined the Commu- nity. The British feel they have not received a fair return on their contribution to Commu- nity operating expenses. A temporary settlement of the issue was made a week after the May 18 majority vote, with further agreement that the question of a more permanent settle- ment would be taken up later. (Euromarket News] COMMON MKT. REP. (CCH) No. 699, at 1 (June 9, 1982). ' European economic cooperation was formalized in the Treaty Establishing the Euro- pean Economic Community (Treaty of Rome), done March 25, 1957, 298 U.N.T.S. 11 (unof- ficial English version) [hereinafter cited as EEC Treaty].
    [Show full text]
  • The Power of Initiative of the European Commission: a Progressive Erosion?
    The Power of Initiative of the European Commission: A Progressive Erosion? Paolo PONZANO, Costanza HERMANIN and Daniela CORONA Preface by António Vitorino Studies & 89 Research Study & The Power of Initiative 89 of the European Commission: Research A Progressive Erosion? PAOLO PONZANO, COSTANZA HERMANIN AND DANIELA CORONA Preface by António Vitorino Paolo PONZANO is a senior fellow at the European University Institute and a special adviser of the European Commission. Former collaborator of Altiero Spinelli at the Institute for International Affairs in Rome, he has worked for the European Commission from 1971 to 2009. He was formerly Director for Relations with the Council of ministers, subsequently for Institutional Matters and Better Regulation. He was also Alternate Member of the European Convention in 2002/2003. He published several articles and chapters on the EU institutions. He teaches European Governance and Decision-Making at the University of Florence and at the European College of Parma as well as European Law at the University of Rome. Costanza HERMANIN is a researcher in the department of social and political science of the European University Institute, where she is about to complete her PhD. Her research interests comprise EU social and immigration policy, EU institutional affairs, and human rights and immigration policy in Italy. She has been visiting fellow at several places (WZB, CERI, Columbia, Berkeley). She is the co-editor of a forthcoming book on “Fighting Race Discrimination in Europe” (Routledge, 2012). She has been publishing on Italian and English speaking journals. Daniela CORONA is currently research collaborator at the Robert Schuman Center for Advanced Studies at the European University Institute in Florence where she completed her PhD.
    [Show full text]
  • Qualified Majority Voting from the Single European Act to Present Day: an Unexpected Permanence
    Qualified majority voting from the Single European Act to present day: an unexpected permanence Stéphanie NOVAK Studies & 88 Research Study & Qualified majority voting from the Single European Act 88 to the present day: Research an unexpected permanence Stéphanie novak Stéphanie Novak Stéphanie Novak is a research fellow at the Hertie School of Governance (Berlin). She previously held research positions at the European University Institute (Florence), Collège de France (Paris) and Harvard University. She holds a Ph.D. in political science (Institut d’études politiques de Paris, 2009) and is an alumna of the École normale supérieure (ENS). She graduated in philosophy (Master and agregation). Her Ph.D. thesis was published in 2011 by Dalloz, Paris: La prise de décision au Conseil de l’Union européenne. Pratiques du vote et du consensus. Qualified majority voting from the Single european act to the preSent day: an unexpected permanence Notre Europe Notre Europe is an independent think tank devoted to European integration. Under the guidance of Jacques Delors, who created Notre Europe in 1996, the association aims to “think a united Europe”. Our ambition is to contribute to the current public debate by producing analyses and pertinent policy proposals that strive for a closer union of the peoples of Europe. We are equally devoted to promoting the active engagement of citizens and civil society in the process of community construction and the creation of a European public space. In this vein, the staff of Notre Europe directs research projects; produces and disseminates analyses in the form of short notes, studies, and articles; and organises public debates and seminars.
    [Show full text]
  • The EU-NATO Syndrome: Spotlight on Transatlantic Realities
    ▌JCER Volume 3 • Issue 2 99 The EU-NATO Syndrome: Spotlight on Transatlantic Realities Hajnalka Vincze Abstract This article examines the relations between the European Union (EU) and NATO in light of both of the current, deeply unhealthy, state of the transatlantic relationship, and of its ongoing evolution. The first part is devoted to a retrospective outline of the links between European defence and the Atlantic system, which highlights the major constant features of these last sixty years, as well as the rupture points. Then, various issues, from the problem of the division of labour and the definition of the chain of command to coordination on the ground and arms procurement, are evoked as concrete examples where the same fundamental question marks emerge, again and again; all of them revolving around the concept of sovereignty – that of the Europeans vis-à-vis America. It is suggested in the article that current European dependence does not allow but superficial and/or temporary ‘progress’ in EU-NATO relations, just as is the case in the broader Euro-American relationship. As long as Europeans will not assume fully the objective of autonomy (i.e. freedom of decision and action, with all the commitments it would imply), their subjection will continue to generate increasing tensions, since this inherent imbalance is not only detrimental to Europe’s own interests, but it also excludes any reciprocity and prohibits any genuine partnership with the United States. CONTRARY TO THE TWO DOMINANT, ALBEIT DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED, TYPES of forecasts that were both highly fashionable a few years ago, it appears more and more clearly that the headaches related to the EU-NATO conundrum are here to stay.
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF (422.4
    Table of cases and legislation EUROPEAN UNION Communications, Guidance and Notices Communication from the Commission, Guidelines on the application of Art. 81(3) of the Treaty, 2004/C 101/08, OJ C101/97, 27.4.2004 ............................270 Guidance on the Commission’s enforcement priorities in applying Art. 82 of the EC Treaty to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings, OJ C045, 24.02.2009 ......................................................................................269 Commission Notice ‘Guidelines on Vertical Restraints,’ European Commission, Brussels, 10 May 2010, SEC (2010) ................................. 272, 273 Communication from the Commission, Guidelines on the Applicability of Art. 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to Horizontal Co-operation Agreements, OJ, 2011/C 11/01, 2011 ......................270 Decisions Commission Decision (86/398/EEC) relating to a proceeding under Art. 85 of the EEC Treaty (IV/31.149 – Polypropylene), [1986] OJ L230/1, [1988] 4 CMLR 347 .................................................................................................266 Regulations Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002, OJ L 1, 4.1.2003 Art. 2 .............................................................................................................174 Art. 9 .............................................................................................................267 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings, OJ
    [Show full text]
  • The Conference on the Future of Europe a New Model to Reform the EU?
    The Conference on the Future of Europe A New Model to Reform the EU? Federico Fabbrini* WORKING PAPER No 12 / 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Plans for the Conference on the Future of Europe 3. Precedents of the Conference on the Future of Europe 4. The rules on EU treaty reform 5. The practice of inter-se treaties outside the EU legal order 6. Reforming the EU through a Political Compact 7. Conclusions ABSTRACT The paper offers a first analysis of the recent plan to establish a Conference on the Future of Europe to reform the European Union (EU), comparing this initiative with two historical precedents to relaunch the EU – namely the Conference of Messina and the Convention on the Future of Europe – and considering the legal rules and political options for treaty reform in the contemporary EU. To this end, the paper overviews prior efforts to reform the EU, and points out the conditions that led to the success or failures of these initiatives. Subsequently it examines the technicalities of the EU treaty amendment rules and emphasizes the challenge towards treaty reform resulting from the need to obtain unanimous approval by all member states. The paper then assesses the increasing tendency by member states to use inter-se international treaties – particularly in response to the euro-crisis – and underlines how these have introduce new ratification rules, overcoming unanimity. Drawing lessons from these precedents, finally, the paper suggests what will be a condition for the success of the Conference on the Future of Europe, and argues that this should resolve to draft a new treaty – a Political Compact – designed to push forward integration among those member states that so wish.
    [Show full text]
  • Steps to European Unity Community Progress to Date: a Chronology This Publication Also Appears in the Following Languages
    Steps to European unity Community progress to date: a chronology This publication also appears in the following languages: ES ISBN 92-825-7342-7 Etapas de Europa DA ISBN 92-825-7343-5 Europa undervejs DE ISBN 92-825-7344-3 Etappen nach Europa GR ISBN 92-825-7345-1 . '1;1 :rtOQEta P'J~ EiiQW:rtTJ~ FR ISBN 92-825-7347-8 Etapes europeennes IT ISBN 92-825-7348-6 Destinazione Europa NL ISBN 92-825-7349-4 Europa stap voor stap PT ISBN 92-825-7350-8 A Europa passo a passo Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1987 ISBN 92-825-7346-X Catalogue number: CB-48-87-606-EN-C Reproduction authorized in whole or in pan, provided the source is acknowledged Printed in the FR of Germany Contents 7 Introduction 9 First hopes, first failures (1950-1954) 15 Birth of the Common Market (1955-1962) 25 Two steps forward, one step back (1963-1965) 31 A compromise settlement and new beginnings (1966-1968) 35 Consolidation (1968-1970) 41 Enlargement and monetary problems (1970-1973) 47 The energy crisis and the beginning of the economic crisis (1973-1974) 53 Further enlargement and direct elections (1975-1979) 67 A Community of Ten (1981) 83 A Community of Twelve (1986) Annexes 87 Main agreements between the European Community and the rest of the world 90 Index of main developments 92 Key dates 93 Further reading Introduction Every day the European Community organizes meetings of parliamentar­ ians, ambassadors, industrialists, workers, managers, ministers, consumers, people from all walks of life, working for a common response to problems that for a long time now have transcended national frontiers.
    [Show full text]