22 Pages
Unlock Document

Political Science
Wolfram Hilz

POL207 STUDY 3.Sept 26, 2011 GOALS: 1) Understand how Stalin dropped his “mask of formal democracy” a. 1946 stalin said  Greek communists, who controlled large areas of the country, not to continue with an armed insurrection against the government that the British has installed in Athens b. 1946 Stalin refused to withdraw its troops from Persia which was also outside tis sphere, and made territorial demands on turkey 2) Understand why Germany‟s partition and Western Germany‟s integration in the West was without alternative a. there was economic and social dislocation and political dislocation as govenrmetns tht had collaborated with the nazies were displaced. Germany and austrai remained ocupaied and divided between the occupation zones of the allies b. collapse of the Four-power council of Foreign ministers, a standing conference to discuss the administration and future of Germany  Soviet inflextibility led to their representatives eventual walk- pout in april 1947  the emergence of separate West and East GErmna States became gradually inevitable c. 2 things of concern in the German Problem  a) for USA + Britain linked directly to the emergence of the Cold War.. b) For france and Germany‟s smaller neighbours  question of how to prevent the re-emergence of a threat to their sovereign independence from Germany itself. d. France ideally wanted Germany to be divided and stay divided under allied occupation  that failed but it wanted former Germany to be divided into a large number of small separate states. - again failed. e. Then in 1948, the soviet union walked out of allied talks on the future of Germany  the US and Britain responded by starting to prepare the anglo-american zones for independence  the French were left in no doubt that they were expected to merge their occupation zone into the new west german state which would be created under the plans for independence. Once the Federal Repubic of German came into existence in 1949, the French policy had to be rethought. 3) Understand how the U.S. forced and mobilized its Western European partners to cooperate closer in 1948 a. THE USA  willing to finacnce the recovery through marshall plan in return for reconstruction being on the basis of liberal market economies that were open to competition. To ensure this openness the united states inssited that recovery plans be constructed on a European basis not a national basis. Western European govts had to cope with a demand that they surrender some of their ability to control their national economies as the price for US finanacial assistance. b. Winston Churchill, though formally though about cooperation with the USSR now at the conference of Yalta ( 1945) assured there should be none and that there is not an iron curtain across europe (SOVIET UNION STATES) c. In February 1947, London told Washington it could not afford to continue economic and military air to Greece and Turkey (under soviet)  PREZ TRUMAN march 1947 sent US$4000 million for economic and military air to Greece and Turkey  he said you need to assist free peoples who are resisting attempted subjucation by armed minorities or by outside pessures  TRUMAN DOCTRINE  marked intent for US administration to remain involved in the affairs of Europe and the wides world and not to allow isolationist sentiments withi nteh country and within congress to force a withdrawl from international role d. Italian and French communist waged strikes of revolutionary anti- capitalist rhetoric in light of the events in Greece (further evidence of Soviet Union trying to expand its influence)  French responded by expelling the communists form their coalition government and the Truman administration responsded with the MARSHALL PLAN. e. MARSHALL PLAN  June 5, 1947  GEORGE MARSHALL US SECRETARY OF STATE  proposed financial and food aid to Europe to assist in tis economic recovery. USSR denied basied on grounds for suspicion. i. It gave a picture of Europe as being this starving economically broke place  it was entirely political in its coneption and obvjective  although tis means were entirely economic  midleading representation of economic position in Europe was designed to get the agreement of the US congress to the reconstruction programme. ii. Marshall plan offered an injection of dollars into the ueropean economy  finance trade btwn European states and the United states iii. 13$ million in aid to the stats of western Europe  eastern states declined cuz of soviet union pressures. iv. The European states that accepted held a conferednce in july 1947 in paris and ste up what becam the ORGANIATION OF EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COOPERATION (OEEC)  LATER TO BE KNOWN AS ORGANISATION FOR EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COOPERATION (OEEC) to facilitate the unified response that the united states required. v. Justification for marshall plan  end the spread of communism and soviet expansionism  economic conditions in western Europe in 1947 were so serious that they provided a breeding ground for communism vi. USA‟s part of the deal  committed to the idea of free trade  EUROPEAN INTEGRATION  meaning hat national economic barriers to trade would strengthen aim of strengthening western Europe agsint communist expansion  HWEVS  compatible with the aim of creating a large and exploitable market for US exports and for investments by US multinational corporations. vii. COMMITTEE FOR EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COOPERATION (CEEC)  created to decide on the distribution and sue of the Marshall aid by european states jointly. But USA was representaed on this committee and clearly since it was giving all the funds has the most economic and political leverage viii. This OEEC was to be seen as the future for supranational economic management in Europe. (supranational meaning breaking down national sovereignty in economic affairs) … The US viewed this as the first step to western Europe as a free trade area therefore FREE GLOBAL TRADE.  European states didn‟t like this idea. 1. OEEC  worked for 12 years .. superseded by the organization for economic cooperation and development but it did play a major role in driving home the realization that eurpean economies were mutually depenent and that they prospered or failed together. f. United states did not have enough sufficient political weight over the combined force of France, Britain and the smaller European states to allow the OEEC to develop as a supranational organization. g. 4) Understand why the international framework has been as important for initiatives for European integration in the 1940s as cooperative ideas of the Europeans itself a. Importance of legitimacy and identity, and the importance of external actors and issues in shaping the emerging contours of post-war Europe. b. Faced a demand from their eectorates for security both from economic problems that had afflicted pre-war Europe and from further war. They faed a lack of poplar confidence in the ability of the sovereign national state to meet these demands. They faced a challenge from federalism which offerd an alternative way of organizing Europe politically but one that would have removed the levers of power fmor the hands of national government. Challenge of communism  a way that promised to deliver the economic security thjat people doubted capitalism could deliver. USA challenge  reconstruct economic in a way that would open them to gireign competition, which is met would have reduced the ability of national governments to control the impact of the market on their electorates. c. Combination of internal nad external pressures on governments  all decisions were made intergovernmentally  no supranational institutions to push process forward at this stage. d. Natiaonalism was no course to take due to its position in causing the previous two wars. e. National economic reconstruction f. You must understand the EU in the context of the emerging Cold war  capitalist west vs. communist soviet union  KEEP COMMUNISM OUT OF THE WEST !! NO MORE EXAPNSIONISM 5) Understand why Federalists and Unionists wanted both a better Europe but preferred completely incompatible ways a. The European Union of federalists (EUF) was formed in 1926 from the war-time resistance movements. It attempted to exploit the disruption caused to existing political structures by the war to make a new start on a basis radically different from the Europe of nation states, and to create a deferral constitution of Europe, as part of a more distant plan for global unity. b. The conference, the European Congress, eventually took place in the Hague in May 1948 c. This congress did lead to the creation of the Council of Eurpe, this was so dominated by national govenents that there was little realistic prospect of it developing in the deferral direction that the EUF hoped ( Britain did not want to take part because they didn‟t want their national sovereignty to be taken away in a supranational organization) d. Council of Europe was created here  its important because it stil exists today and has many solid achievements such as – European convention on human rights (1950) and maintained both commission on human rights and a court of human rights i. It was created in 1949, not connected with EU  intergovernmental organization based in the French city of Strasburg  originally 10 members, by 2010 now ahd 47 e. The failure of council of Europe is sometimes blaimed to be cuz of the british but really, no national govt once installed is willing to surrender sobverignty. 6) Understand why the Schuman Plan 1950 was a genuine silent revolution in Europe FRANCEEE IN SCHUMAN PLAN  INVENTORS OF IT…. a. What is the Schuman Plan of 1950  to pool coal nad steel production  involved considerable surrender of soverign control over these instustries in the 6 pariticpating states (Britain didn‟t)  would make war between Germany and France materially impossible  lay foundation for the economic unification of participating states  led to the European Coal and Steel community (ECSC) signed in Treaty of Paris in 1941 and the ECSC came into operation in July 1952 b. Jean Monnet made up the idea (French civil servant) to address the German problem for France  that being  the establishment of the Federal Republic of Germany  a) how to avert the threat of future conflict btwn F + G b) ensure continuting supplies of coal for the French steel industry once the Ruhr region reverted to German sovereign control. c. Originally made as a beginning point later to create a supranational organization that integrates ALL of Western European economic bounds i. Problems  1. 1)how to organize Franco-German relations in such a way that another war between the two states wont ensue (control Germany in the French mind) a. It would provide the basis for economic develpokment as a first step twards a federation of Europe and would change the future of those reigions devoted to prodcuintg munitions which had alaso been the most constant victims of war b. *** PROBLEM OF HOW TO CONTROL GERMANY REMAINED AT THE HEART OF THE PROCEAS OF EUROPEAN INTEGRATION THROUGHOUT THE EARLY POST-WAR PERIOD. 2. The Ruhr Region of Germany had been placed under joint allied control. It supplies of coal had been allocated between the various competing users by the international authority of the Ruhr (IAR), which has been established in April 1945.  this arrangement would not last or unlikely last once the Federal Republic was constituted which reaised the q how France could ensreure that it continued to get access to the supply of scarece Ruhr coal that tis steel industry needed. a. SUMMARY  a) first step to road to complete integration of western European economy, finding a way ot organize Franco-German relations that would elimintate prospects of war and solving the problem of how to ensure continued access for the French steel industry to supplies fo coking coal form the Ruhr. GERMANY IN SCHUMAN PLANNN  REASON WHY FRANCE PROPOSED IT - why did they accept it ??  ideal of European itegration, committed himself to Franco-German reconciliation and to European integration, also needed the Federal Rebpulic to gain international acceptance; Adenauer wanted to make a strong commitment to the capitalist west; and a new German government was looking for a way of getting rid of the IAR importance of this was both political and economic cuz politically it was important to him that the region be integrated into the federal republic and economically the Ruhr region had always been one of the powerhouses of the german industrial economy so it was important to the prospects of economic recovery that it be unchained from the restrictions that the UAR placed in tis indsutrialists, wanted FRG to be part of European and international affairs, establish the western capitalist orientation of the Federal republic beyond question or reversal  important cuz the Social Democratic Party was arguing the FRG declare itself neutral in the emerging Cold war in the hope that this would facilitate reunification of the country , also feared cultural influecnec of Russia would be damaging to the vitality of German culture and to the process of moral renewal in the aftermath of nazism, BENELUX STATES IN THE SCHUMAN PLAN  ALL HAD SIMILAR INTERESTS - could not afford to stay out of any agreement btwn france and Germany on coal and steel  commodities essential to economies + high degree of interdependence btwen industries in the border regions of F + G + promised less rish of war between thir two larger enighbours. ITALY REASONS IN SCHUMAN PLAN - closer reasoning of that of Germany  had to rebuild its international reputation after the war, was on the front line in the emerging cold war  geo – it had a land frontier w/ the communist state of Yugoslavia and only the Adriatic sea separated it from Albania + end of the war the risk that the communist itlaian party would take over ramined the largest single party in terms of support. o THEREFORE – wanted country in a complex of institutaional interdependencies with the capitalist west, to establish its western and capitalist identity politically, economically and in the minds fo its own people. BRITAIN NOOOOOOOTTTTT IN THE SCHUMAN PLAN  WHY?? - nationalism had been discredited thorugh tis association with fascism, in britian, fasicm ahd never succeeded and the war ahd been fought as a national war. - Britain had neither been defeated or occupied in the war  therefore no same sense of discontinuity with the past. - British elite thought Britain was not just another European state – it was a world power witjh global responsibilities - It still had a considerable empire – B companies had interstes all parts in the world - British armed forced were globally deployed in eeping peace or acting as barricades against communist encroachment.. - Economically far stronger than the other wester euro states + furue economy w/ G + F = danger - It had adequate indigenous supplies of coal and the LAbour govt had just completed nationalistion of the coal and steel industries. - WERE NOT COOL WITH THE IDEA OF A SUPRANATIONALIST ORGANISATION THAT MONNET WANTED. *** (ex. They were the ones who watered down the idea of the commitment to a suprational instution in the council of Europe) USA ROLE IN SCHUMAN PLANNNNNNNNN  VITAL - a special committee was set up in the US embassy in Paris to monitor progress, and it acted as a sort of additional secretariat for Monnet  the US administration came to the reluctant conclusion that Germany would have to be re-armed after the Korean war. - March 3, 1951  Adenauer was summosed to see John J McCloy US HIGH COMMMISSIONER IN BONN, who told him that the delays caused by the Germans were unacceptable and that France and the USA had no choice but ot impose their own decartelization scheme  Adenaur accepted the ultimatum cuz for him the political gains of the ECSC were paramount and eh could not affor to allow the process to collapse. ( DON‟T REALLY UNDERSTAND ASK DAVE) Conclusion of schuman plan  - first steps of European integration not taking by a federalist approach but a practical one… o move away from natiaonalism  more importantly Jean Monnet was concerned with fixing immediate problems  1) the reconstruction of the two industries that were central to the European economies of the day, coal and steel,  2) how to accommodate West Germany within the system of capitalist European states without reviving the rish of war and without serious damage to the French steel industry. - Long term solution  looking at how to ensure that Europe would be competitive in comparison with the USA. - THEME OF SCHUMAN PLAN IN EUROPEAN INTEGRATION o Tension between free market capitalism and planned capitalism  Planned capitalism in French known as “dirigisme” – move away from the fragmentation of national markets to form a single large market by controlled planners to proceed economic sector by economic sector. o You have to look at the Schuman plan and the ECSC in terms of the back drop of the coming cold war + soviet union threats  Breakdown of co-op between S.U + the ewestern allies led to the creation of West Germany posing problems how to handle it and how to ensure adequate coking coal for Frech steel manufacturers – colorued raction of the governments to the Schuman Plan particularily Germany and Italy cuz they were in serach of a new identity was particilarily prominent – both states wanted to find a new national identity and oncsoidate their position in the western capitalist camp. ECSC offered them being able to be imbedded into the capitalist west and appeal the idea of federalism to their country. o BARGAINING = theme in European integration … especially bargaining with the USA  US administration exerted influence on the negotitations and imposed tis postiiton onteh maintenance of the alliances – you need to refer to the US in examining EU integration. OCTOBER 3, 2011 - chances and limits of integration from coal and steel to defence GOALS: 1) understand why federalists and unionists wanted both a better Europe but preferred completely incompatible ways 2) understand why the Schuman Plan 1950 was a genuine silent revolution in europe 3) understand why the success of the schuman plan has been dependent of the personal constellation (MONNET, SCHUMAN, ADENAUER) 4) understand why monnet constructed the institutions of the ECSC in a geuine supranational way to overcome national resistance in decision making 5) understand why the ECSC changed the direction of foreign policy of France and the Federal republic of Germany once and foever 6) Understand how the Koreasn war (JUNE 1950) pushed european integration project and highlighted its limitations afterwards a. In june 1950, communist North Korea invaded capitalist South Korea – ensuing civil war involved the United States acting under the auspices of the United Nations on the side fo the South and the Soviet Union and communist China on the side of the North i. This impacts western thinking about security immensely.  they thought that because North (communist) Korea attacked South South (capitalist) Korea, the west though that this might be a precursor to an invasion of West Germany by East Germany ii. And because the US administration had already deployed troops to Korea, they decided that Europeans need to make a bigger contribution to their own defence - firstly, german army had to be iii. Monnet devised a scheme  European Defense community (EDC) instead of having a single german army  pool miliarty resources of Frnace andGermany into a European army (no nationalized german army but every other country involved can have one) SAME COUNTRIES AS ECSC iv. A problem with the proposed EDC was the plan for a common euro army w/o common foreign policy. The proposed institutions of the EDC would not be able to provide this v. FAIL  crucially dependent on French support, but the French govt only signed it on the tacit condition that no immediate attempt should be mad to ratify it.. German rearmament even as part of a European army was unpopular in France 1. by the time intergovernmental negotiations were completeled there had been electins in France and the parliamentary arithmetic did not indicate a clear majority for ratification. Successive PM refused to bring the Treat to the Assembly for ratification fearing tis failures would bring down their govt. 2. demise of EDC = demise of EPC vi. had it not been for the internaiontal crisis of the Korean War, the EDC and EPC would never have surfaced. RANDOM NOTES FROM TEXT  - European defence community (EDC) ran parallel with ECSC and was connected with - proposal the proposal to the idea of creating the European polticial community (EPC) to provde demoractic europeean structures for coordinating foreing policies o provided federalists with another opportunity to pursue their strategy of the constitutional break moving directly from a Europe of national states to a federal constitution for Europe  FAIL – no govt‟s wanted to surrender their sovereignty o Treaties of Rome established the European economic community (EEC) and the European atomic energy commminty (euratom) - Another plan devised by Monnet  the Pleven Plan for a European Defence Community (EDC) -- failure of this was perhaps as much responsible as the successes and failures of the ECSC in explaining the initiatives that led to the Treaties of ROME ***** - The BRUSSELS TREATY of 1948  extended to Germany and Italy a loose organization called the Western European Union (WEU) as set up in coordinacnec with the alliance an organic linik was made with NATO to which Germany and Italy were admitted - WEU – overshadowed by NATO – further shows US‟s importance in European integration. - SIG‟s of EDC episode/related EPC initiative  kept federalist idea alive – this became clear with the relaunching of Europe that followed the collapse of EDC - Collapse of EDC – BRIT GOV – alternative security structure for WESTERN EUROPE involving IT and GER to the Brussels treaty of 1948 – treat any act of aggression against one as an act of aggression agsint all o WEU – 1980‟s – bridge btwn EU + NATO for euro security and defence identity o EU declaration on WEU in 1992 – WEU will be developed as the defence compoenent fo the European union and as a means to strengthen European pillar of the atlantic alliance – WEU operational activities transferred to EU in 2000 .. terminated in march 2010 - SUEZ CRISIS  nationalization of the Zuez Canal by Egyptian President Gmala Abedel nasser not only casused outrage in france as it di in Britain but italso offered the Frech a possible excuse to topple Nasser whose pan- Arab rhetoric ingrlamde the situation in Alergia whose remine was suspected fo sheltering arming the Alegerian rebels o The episode was perceivned in France as a natianl humniliation at the hand so f he Americans but also a betrayal by the British who were believed to be too subservient to US wishes. It fed support for the nationalist position of CAHERLES DE GAULLE who subsequently came to office as first President fo the New Fifrth Republicin may 1958  and fed into the messina negotiations helping them to reach a speedy and successful consusion/ it gave support to the ceoneptvof France acting togehte with other European states. Indirectly the clear tsigns that this episode marked the beginning fo the end fo the govt of Mollet and the strong indications that ehwould be succeeded by de gaulle who had always opposed European integration, accelereated the eddorts to reach agreement. A RUSH TO ROME begain in effeort to get the Treaties signed before de Gaulle came to office and aborted the whole experiement. - SPAAK REPORT of march 1956  was the creation of the general common market favoured by the German govt o 3 main parts which the F govt extracted concessions: Euratom, agriculture,
More Less

Related notes for POL207Y1

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.