Eur integration les 2 PDF

Preview

Summary

Les 2 lesnotities van European Integration...

Description

Eur integration les 2 17/2/2020 Today and next week: history of eur integr Core: why are states willing to join? To share power? We need theories of integration < bottom up 3 thinkers about Eur intergr: Mitrany: after WOI league of nationas was establishes to prevent any war, it did not work,  WOII. LON: traty where it was based on was not binding enough. His diagnosis was why do have conflict?= nationalism. States should not be temptet to fall back to nationalist/protectionist interests at all costs. Not going to work by global federation, or if you leave it to politicians. Let bureaucrats design function regimes, collaborative institutions on economics or parts of economics for example. (=depoliticize) Altiero Spinelli: inspired by same idea of Mitrany about nationalism and conflict. They said that politicians should take responsibility to integrate. It should be a political project (“the united states of Europe”)  Same analysis for both but different ways of thinking! J Monnet – functional federalism: developed a whole idea about eur intergr which is picked up by politicians. Ha wanted Europe be prosperious after WOII, WITH Germany. Wanted to incorporate them in European project, to this in a controlled way. & also he said that you have to do this slowly, step by step: doing one sector and making sure it works, and then try an other sector… before you know it you have one single currency. Schuman was the one who introduced Monnet’s thinking because he was a politician and Monnet wasn’t Theories of IR: try to explain behavior of states. Theories for eur integr: different types of behavior 2 theories of IR: realism and liberalism Realism: self interest, no international authority (bcs “it is chaos”), states as main actors, all about power, safeguard their power in chaotic world  rational actors. Liberalism: look at what actors do beyond their state= transnationally. Ex similar economic interests between countries: how do they behave and across who do they work? They think collaboration is beneficial for them. States in fifties were willing to take it far to integrate. Realists could not explain this. European integration theories Neo-functionalism (from liberalism): functional spill over: from one sector to an other. Eu started with coal and steel, and than went further and further. Political spillover: from private domestic groups. Cultivated spillover: instit built for supporting integration, start having own interests. (bcs more integration= more power and money for insIitutions). Problems with neo-funct: they noticed they cannot explain in empirical reality. Means they have to adjust their theory.

Intergovernmentalism (tekst v Stanley Hoffman gaat hierover in tegenstelling tot Monnet & Schuman): born from realism, rival theory of functionalism: in 60’s, Charles De Gaulles. Try to explain empirical reality. We have to look at governance… to understand what a state does, you have to look within it. Hoffman = “father of intergovernmentalism” These theories developed in early days of eur integr to understand different cases and sectors. Were developed in 60’s, 70’s. 2 main angles/visions on European integration: supranationalism/federalism VS intergovernmentalism Supranationalism: lots of decisionmaking. “above the nation state” Intergovernmentalist: also in favour of integration but lesser extent. “governance between states” decisions should be made between governments. Churchill!!! for example. He gave famous speech in Zurich where he said ok we need to collab in Europe but it has to be done by states. States will remain more important. Council of Europe (raad v Europa)  mensenrechten, in Straatsburg. Btw very intergovernmental; not same as European Council (Europese raad)/council of ministers/ council of European Union (raad vd Europese Unie) OESO: reflect cooperation in Europe France was suspicious towards Germany but Monnet convinces French government to accept the recovery of Germany but under conditions. Monnet  it’s all about institutions. They limit or trigger behavior. Schuman declaration: proposal to establish a supranational org. May 9 1950 , May 9 is also national Europe day. UK was not invited… why coal and steel?? Prevent war bcs if you integrate coal and steal (esp germans bcs they have a lot) when you do this in integrzated way, you make sure whatever comes out of this coal and steel integration, is not used individually by states for military ends. So, by doing it together, you prevent the mis use of this (make weapens etc) ECSC/EGKS established with treaty of Paris Structure of ECSC: high authority= European commission, councill of ministers, common assembly= European parliament, court of justice. These inst would create common/single market for control under production, price setting, export, selling…. 1950. Plan of Monnet: start small and then spill over, this worked. Europe went way too fast and it failed. They were forces to take big stept instead of incremental ones: from coal to steel until military. Were forced to do that bcs of cold war

Paul Henri Spaak: Belgian minister who was very pro- European. : had to write sth about atomic energy (?) IGC: set of negotiations to change treaty

Euratom: integration ibt atomic energy Euratom + eec (’57 European economic community) became ONE in ’65: EC= European community De Gaulle and Tatcher have the same idea: free market supporters, both nationalists, in favour of economic intergrations to extend that this will benefit national interest. In favor of integr but in intergovernmental way. Especially in sectors that would benefit them. For France especially agriculture. For De Gaulles to remain in power it was important to support agriculture people. EFTA (europese vrijhandels associatie, eva) als concurentie v EC. Leden v EFTA: UK? Austria, denmark, norway, portugal, sweden, finland Fouchet-plan: faziled bcs they though if they’d do it in de Gaulles wzay, i twill bet o superficial and not enough

Europe is not only financed by member states but they also have own resources...