• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Assess the reasons why Britain's reactions to European co-operation changed in the period 1945-63.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Assess the reasons why Britain's reactions to European co-operation changed in the period 1945-63 In the years after WW2 there was strong opposition in Britain toward possible European integration. Britain had not faced Nazi occupation and still retained her Empire unlike her European ' cousins'. However, by 1961, she was deeply involved in European affairs and organisations. This shift in policy was not a sudden change of thought but a gradual adherence towards European opinion. How did this change come about? Initially, Britain's main resistance to any form of integration within Europe stemmed from two concerns, firstly that it would require power to be handed over to a supra-national organisation, resulting in the loss of her prized national sovereignty. Secondly, fear that such integration had the potential to cut across her economic and political ties with its Empire. The British Empire still stretched across the world and Imperialistic attitudes still remained. At the end of WW2 many still held the view that Britain, and its Empire, could become the 'Third World Power' behind the U.S. ...read more.

Middle

At the same time as the establishment of the ECSC, European countries were also considering the establishment of an integrated, multi-national European Army responsible to a European Organisation, as first put forward under the Plevin plan in October 1950. Britain's initial reaction, exemplified by Bevin and Attlee, was to dismiss this plan, at least until the U.S. showed its full support for it and for German rearmament. Even then, constant bickering between France and Britain resulted, often about the need to make firm commitments regarding the exact deployment of troops. It was only when Germany was admitted to NATO that progress finally occurred as British worries over the creation of a supranational European organisation dissipated and the British could maintain its foot in two camps, Europe and the US. With progress occurring on many fronts (e.g. ECSC, NATO) it was not long before European countries were looking for more general economic and political integration. Such integration, provided it included Germany, would give others such as France access to the biggest and fastest growing economy. ...read more.

Conclusion

was pressurising Britain into joining. Essentially the main reason was that EEC was performing well and Britain's EFTA was performing poorly. But the application was turned down by De Gaulle who, ironically, used Britain's concerns over supranationality as an excuse for his refusal even though France, itself, preferred inter-governmental co-operation between sovereign states as a basis for the continuing operation of the EEC. The 1960's showed Britain continuing its effort to join the EEC, without success. Initially its Commonwealth links could be used by France as a reason for refusing EEC membership as these economic links might potentially undermine France's determination to maintain a highly subsidized Common Agricultural Policy. Unfortunately, Britain's reliance on US Polaris submarine capabilities, its inability to generate sufficient resources to pay for expensive military equipment (e.g. Blue Streak), or to act independently in a military capacity (e.g. Suez Crisis) but particularly its recognition that the world was passing it by as new political and economic alliances were being forged, meant that EEC membership applications had to continue even if national pride was damaged by each refusal. The Britain of the 1960's had fallen behind European countries because of its refusal to lay down old concepts and start afresh. Ian Chandler ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level European Union section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level European Union essays

  1. Why did Britain join the EEC in 1973 and not in 1957?

    Britain needed the conditions so the Commonwealth commitments and the Community's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) were considered. There was also a lot of opposition within the Conservative government and Labour Party towards applying to the EEC. With the combination of only joining "if the conditions were right" and the oppositions

  2. The Institutional Consequences of Domestic Politics on Africa's International Relations and Regional Cooperation.

    The puzzle which this raises again would be where a man is the Chairman of a town union, he strives to be honest and accountable to the union because of traditional checks and balances are there even when they may not have emerged as visible structures, but the same man

  1. The Institution of the European Union and Theories.

    Over 150 000 Europeans are employed directly by the cosmetics industry and an additional 350 000 indirectly in retail, distribution and transports sectors. This is due to the industry's considerable investment in scientific research and development, product innovation and expansion into new markets the globe.

  2. The EU's CFSP and the Iraq Crisis: A Catalyst for Change?

    When it comes to the military, member states also have totally separate armed forces, each with its unique set of capabilities, processes, traditions and skill sets. This is not to downplay the efforts of organizations like NATO, which over the years has proven its ability to effectively coordinate multi-national force deployments.

  1. Transformation of the U.S. Hegemony in Europe through NATO after the Cold War

    the United States would leave Europe, a shift from multilateral, transparent, cooperative approach to a nationalistic, competitive one. These concerns would prove invalid with U.S. Post-cold war efforts regarding the region. For many, the issue was simply the type of role the U.S.

  2. What does citizenship mean in the European context?

    But here too one cannot avoid the uneasy feeling of a mealy mouthed commitment. Any such extension will require unanimity -- increasingly difficult in a Community of fifteen, the European Parliament -- on a matter of citizenship, note -- will only be consulted, and to cap it, the decision --

  1. Evaluate the view thatEuropean integration and not, extended cooperation between states, was the onlyconceivable ...

    At this time of period, "European integration was not to be achieved in one great act of political will, because the will was not there"(George & Bache 2001). In 1947, national governments were not remotely willing to surrender their national sovereignty to any extent.

  2. La mthode Monnet: What were the main driving forces behind the supranational integration of ...

    Monnet's proposals entailed the idea of federalism within the European states, which would involve some surrender of national autonomies. Britain would have no political control over her own economy, and thus had no interest in such plans. She was already one of the leading powers of the world due to

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work