[clozet]

Am I the only one out there doing this?!

If anyone else is out there doing this module...a question to help revision.

How seriously did Britain take European co-operation and integration in the period from 1945-1963? Explain your answer...

Any takers?

[x_LiNk_x]

Hey,

I am doing module as well, and that is the one question I am really stuck on!

If you find anything please share

[clozet]

welll...

PLAN

Intro: effect of ww2; commonwealth vs Europe

Didnt take seriously:
- Commonwealth & Empire interests, attempting to make the empire pay, thus only associate of ECSC and observer sent to Messina 1955, did not sign treaty of Rome 1957.
- Even after Suez Britain remained committed to empire until 1959.
- Macmillan had to continue Eden's policies to gain public support.
thus Britain not committed to integration.
Did take seriously:
- Economically necessary
- US pressure and NATO
- Cold war in Europe
- winds of change 1960
Conclusion: not committed to integration until 1959, but happy to co-operate.
-

[x_LiNk_x]

Here is the mark scheme for that question:

Many are likely to argue that Britain did not take European integration seriously until 1960, pointing to Britain’s traditional world status, the extent of imperial involvement throughout the period, and her concern to shape Europe rather than be shaped by it. The Atlantic alliance was preferred by both Labour and Conservative governments, enabling them to compete at superpower level.

National sovereignty was invoked as a reason for staying out. Britain wanted none of the Pleven Plan for a European Defence Union, preferring the NATO alliance and the US on military matters, and her own trading organisations (EFTA etc) for the economy. The Schumann Plan and EEC were similarly mistrusted or not considered suitable for Britain. Europe became just another factor in domestic politics. Its thrust in the EEC – French control over German iron and steel- were less of an issue for Britain. Bevin was interested in a European Third Force, but it was more to deter. Economic issues also dictated Britain’s go it alone attitude up to 1960.

Those who argue for a serious approach to Europe may stress its economic recovery and British initiatives such as the Council of Europe in 1949, or the Eden Plan of 1952, with leadership coming through the OEEC and NATO. However, devaluation of the pound in 1949 encouraged Europe to find her own economic salvation, whilst the Board of Trade and the Treasury both opposed entry because of economic weakness, the disruption of Free Trade and the need to protect Sterling. Churchill, Bevan, Attlee and Eden were all sceptical and, although they took the issue seriously, did not see British interest as lying with Europe. France consistently made it easy for Britain not to involve itself and thus accused Britain of not taking it seriously.

[x_LiNk_x]

Anyone know how to expand the points on this?