This slightly exaggerated statement by the Bolshevik revolutionary, though referring to a soviet-republican idea of Europe, marks the borderlines of British ambivalence towards European integration after 1945: the fear of a supranational federation and the need for a peaceful, stable and free-trading Europe.
“I am British. I am not European” – These are the words of a shopkeeper who among a small group of other “metric martyrs” in 2001 refused to attach to the metric system that had been imported to Great Britain.2 This man was not a philosopher, a historian and certainly not a politician, and his fundamental belief did not refer to the Union, the Empire or the Continent, but to himself as an individual.
Is Great Britain’s reluctance to join the European Union – or rather: to consider oneself European – based entirely on metaphysical convictions, on emotions and ancient sentiments such as “the Empire”? Or are there reasonable arguments for British refusal of European alliance – economical reasons, considerations of power or even force?
Do the British consider themselves part of an “Anglo-American” axis or merely a bridge between Old Europe and the New World?
The following text gives an overview of the process of European integration from a British perspective. It will further discuss the difficulties in defining the difference between “British” and “European” as an attempt to answer the question whether the United Kingdom can be European while remaining British at all.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Great Britain and Europe until 1945
3. Britain’s way into the European Union
a. 1945 – 1961
b. 1961 – 1975
c. 1975 – 1990
d. 1990 – now
4. British vs. European
5. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This work examines the historical, cultural, and political factors contributing to Great Britain's ambivalent relationship with European integration. It aims to answer the central research question of whether the United Kingdom can be truly European while maintaining its distinct British identity, given its historical ties to the Empire and the United States.
- The historical evolution of British perspectives on Europe from 1945 to the present.
- The tension between national sovereignty and supranational integration.
- The impact of the "Anglo-American" relationship on British foreign policy.
- Cultural and geographical factors that shape British national identity versus European integration.
- The role of political leadership and domestic debates in the UK's participation in the European Union.
Excerpt from the Book
3. Britain’s way into the European Union
First British plans about the redrawing of the European map after the war saw no cooperation among equal powers. Ernest Bevin, Foreign Secretary in the Labour Government from 1945-51, pursued a “third power”-policy, which meant a Britain “independent of, and equal to, America” within a wider system of a western anti-communist alliance. This third power was also to act as a bridge between the Continent and America.
In 1950, French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman initiated the economic cooperation on coal and steel, the ECSC (“Schuman-plan”), originally between France and Germany, but with Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxemburg joining them. Despite the fact that Britain already had a vital coal and steel industry, further cooperation was not considered a tactical advantage because of multiple reasons:
Britain did not have the same straight interest in controlling Germany. France, in opposition, had an “obsessive fear” of its eastern neighbour country and the will to control it, which was impossible by military force only;
Britain still did half of its trade with the Empire-Commonwealth;
a lasting cooperation between France and Germany, seemed unlikely. Britain considered itself the only possible “honest broker” between the two countries, which was seen as a guarantee for political importance;
the idea of loosing some national sovereignty (by tying the industry together) in order to achieve national aims seemed – and to many Britains still seems – paradox;
the formerly mentioned Idea of a “third bloc”.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces the core problem of British ambivalence towards European integration, highlighting the conflict between national autonomy and the benefits of a united Europe.
2. Great Britain and Europe until 1945: This section explores the historical self-perception of Britain as an Empire and world power, providing the background for its later reluctance to join European institutions.
3. Britain’s way into the European Union: This chapter analyzes the chronological development of British involvement in European integration, from early post-war policies to the Maastricht Treaty and beyond.
4. British vs. European: This chapter discusses the conceptual difficulties in defining "Britishness" versus "Europeanness," focusing on cultural, geographical, and political factors.
5. Conclusion: This chapter summarizes the historical and political reasons for British skepticism, suggesting that the question of European priority remains a central, unresolved issue for British politics.
Keywords
Great Britain, European Integration, European Union, British Empire, Sovereignty, Anglo-American, Foreign Policy, Euro-sceptics, National Identity, History, Labour, Conservatives, Maastricht Treaty, Economic Policy, Trade.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper explores the historical and political process of Great Britain's engagement—and frequent reluctance—regarding European integration after 1945.
What are the primary thematic fields covered?
The main themes include British foreign policy, the decline of the British Empire, the relationship with the United States, and the internal political conflict between "pro-Europeans" and "Euro-sceptics."
What is the central research question?
The work attempts to answer whether the United Kingdom can realistically be European while preserving its distinct national identity and historical global ties.
Which methodology is utilized?
The author uses a historical-analytical approach, drawing on political theory, diplomatic history, and academic literature to evaluate British policy decisions across several decades.
What content does the main body provide?
The main body offers a chronological overview of Britain's entry into the European community and examines the cultural and structural "exceptionalism" that distinguishes Britain from its continental counterparts.
Which keywords best describe the work?
Key terms include European Integration, British Empire, Sovereignty, Anglo-American, and National Identity.
How did the Suez Crisis affect Britain's European policy?
The 1956 Suez Crisis is identified as a moment where Britain lost its standing as a primary global "manager," forcing a re-evaluation of its role and increasing the necessity for European partnership.
What role does the "Anglo-American" axis play in the author's argument?
The author presents the "Anglo-American" relationship as a consistent counterweight to European integration, often causing British policymakers to hesitate or prioritize the "special relationship" over deeper European cooperation.
- Citation du texte
- Ludwig Andert (Auteur), 2006, Great Britain and European Integration – The Reluctant Nation, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/110740
