EEC, Euratom, empty chair crisis, European Communities Flashcards
Who came up with the Euratom/EEC in the Rome Treaties?
Monnet and Spaak came with Euratom, Beyen came with EEC
Why the proposal for Euratom
ECSC was a success, Monnet wanted to go further with European integration. Oil and nuclear energy were upcoming instead of coal and steel. ECSC was also quite interventionist (dirigiste) so the ECSC mandate didn’t get extended to nuclear energy as this style was not popular w member states.
Why the proposal for EEC
To move towards a single market. Beyen was a liberal and the Dutch economy is fairly competitive, so this would be profitable for Dutch firms.
Positions on Euratom and EEC of France
Euratom:
Positive. France wanted more technological cooperation in atomic energy and needed funding for civil use. They saw it as a way for France to become a nuclear power.
EEC:
France had inefficient farms so they wanted subsidies for access to markets. It was important for the to protect their welfare state and labour conditions. They also wanted to be able to strengthen ties with their former colonies and give them preferential access to European markets than other countries outside of Europe.
Positions of Germany on Euratom and EEC
Euratom:
They did not want to fund France to become a nuclear power. They did want some atomic cooperation to help Germany develop on a nuclear level despite war related restrictions.
EEC:
They wanted to protect competitiveness as they were an industrial power, so they were not happy with plans for welfare states and high standard labour laws. Thus they were also against the French interventionist (dirigiste) model.
How did the negotiations for Euratom and EEC succeed despite the opposite positions of Germany and France?
1: Spaak’s rule of negotiation.
He was clever with playing with time by stalling negotiations when they were about to get stuck and continue them later. This was the case when France blocked EEC due to protests from producers in fear of competition. The negotiations continued with compromise where there was a focus on negative integration, which was in favour of Germany. There were still obstructions over agriculture and social policy so Spaak said to use this as a starting point instead of agreeing to resolve the issue.
Didn’t let technicall issues overshadow political will.
Made package deals by having Euratom and EEC linked.
2: External crises in Suez and Hungary
UK pulled out of plan with France to attack Egypt which made them realise they weren’t as powerful and that they can’t rely on the UK. Germany had problems in eastern borders due to communist threat. This raised awareness of the weakness of western Europe and thus a need for cooperation.
3: France forces Germany into concessions.
Due to France’s weak domestic position on this issue they could force Germany into concessions by saying they have their hands tied and need an agreement. This was doable because Germany needed France for the agreement on both Euratom and EEC and Adenhauer saw the rise of French nationalism.
Result of negotiations on Euratom and EEC
Germany made side payments towards Euratom; EEC was done through Common Agricultural Policy which was funding for national farms.
There was preferential access for former colonies and Germany needed to reaffirm position with European integration due to communist threat
Institutions of Euratom and EEC
High Authority remains. Same Court of Justice and Parliamentary Assembly. Own Council of Ministers and Commission.
QMV in both = qualified majority voting. Qualification of what counts as a majority.
Result of Euratom
More technological operation
Facilitation of joint investments for civil use
Degree of sharing of uranium
Joint cooperation with third parties like US
Result of EEC
Customs union, transition towards single market
Freedom of movement of goods, services, capital and persons
Funds for employment and social policies
Promotion and protection for agriculture
Association of former colonies
Context of the Empty chair crisis
Geopolitical context was volatile and governments were worried due to the Cold War missile crisis. The EEC resulted in economic growth
Customs union to be finalised in 1962
Work on CAP
de Gaulle as president blocks European integration as he’s a nationalist. Vetoes UK entry to EEC twice in order to keep their influence. Forces UK to accept everything France wants, which drags out negotiations. UK and US get nuclear deal –> France says they’re not committed to European integration
What is the Empty chair crisis
In 1965, de Gaulle against supranationalism of the Communities so doesn’t show up to meetings which means nothing gets accepted due to need for unanimity
Why Empty chair crisis
Commission proposed a system of financing the CAP that would have given the EEC its own financial resources. This was linked to a proposal to increase the budgetary powers of the EPA which, to de Gaulle, would be another supranational institution deciding on funding
Result of Empty chair crisis
Luxembourg compromise.
Idea was to agree to disagree by maintaining national vetoes in the case of anything that counts as a national interest despite QMV. This caused CAP proposals to shut down and funding was done by national contributions. This destroyed European integration as governments could now spin everything as a national interest.
Context Hague summit 1969
New French president Pompidou. Gaullist but in favour of UK cooperation because he thinks it will balance out German Ostpolitik by Brandt. Pompidou also in favour of CAP. This was to compensate the Luxembourg compromise by widening, completion and deepening
