The process of British integration with European Union

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

The process of British integration with European Union

The modern international relations between the United Kingdom and EU have entered probably the most complicated phase. As British nation has formally started the process of leaving the organization, it is important to investigate the process that led to the current state of affairs. The relations between parties have become unstable and significantly changed during last years. The process of integration has always been quite tough and now resulted in British decision to exit the European Union. Possible reasons for such events are to be studied while referring back to the past. The role of the United Kingdom in the further policies of the EU remains the topic of the highest importance.

The history of the relations between the European Union and the United Kingdom was studied by D. Macshane, K.O. Morgan, J. Black, P. Mangold, R. Pierce, H. Valen, C. Moore, P. Cowley, J. Garry, P. Gannon etc.

The goal of the paper is to research the development of the relationships between the United Kingdom and the European Union and the main features of integration processes.

The United Kingdom's relationship with the EU - or, in political parlance, «Europe» - has long been one of the most divisive, emotive issues in British politics. The formation of the European Union had its origins after 1945, in the desire to tie Europe's nations so closely together that they could never again wreak such damage on each other. W. Churchill fully supported this idea, proposing for Europe «a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom… a kind of the United States of Europe» [5].

However, as the European Coal and Steel Community was forged in 1951, Britain stood on the sidelines; and it declined an invitation to join the six founding nations of the European Economic Community in signing the Treaty of Rome in 1957. One of the architects of the ECSC, Frenchman J. Monnet, said: «I never understood why the British did not join. I came to the conclusion that it must have been because it was the price of victory - the illusion that you could maintain what you had, without change» [1].

With its own economy stuck in a rut, Britain saw France and Germany posting a strong post-war recovery and forming a powerful alliance, and changed its mind. It applied to join the EEC in 1961, only for entry to be vetoed - twice - by French President Ch. de Gaulle. He accused Britain of a «deep-seated hostility» towards European construction, and of being more interested in links with the US. Britain may have had selfish reasons for wanting to sign up, but then seeking mutual benefits is part of the motivation for the European project. As the historian J. Ellison points out, Europe has not just been a place of conflict for Britain over the centuries. «It was also a place of diplomatic agreement, trade, cooperation and - through most of the second half of the 20th and the 21st centuries - peace and stability and growth,» he says [6].

Conservative Prime Minister E. Heath finally led Britain into the EEC in 1973, after Ch. de Gaulle had left office. When membership was put to a referendum in 1975, it had the support of Britain's three main parties and all its national newspapers. The result was resounding - with more than 67% voting in favour. However that did not end the debate. There was no immediate economic growth - in fact strikes and power cuts continued, and rising oil prices caused double-digit inflation.

In the 1970s, the Conservatives backed British membership - though there was some opposition on the right of the party. The most concerted opposition came from the left of the Labour party, led by T Benn and M. Foot. Mr. Foot's 1983 Labour manifesto promised withdrawal from the EEC - by then more commonly called the European Community (EC) - after the pro-Europe wing of the party had split off to form the SDP [5]. According to Prof Bogdanor, «Europe has been a toxic issue in British politics, not just because it caused division between parties, but also deep divisions within the parties. Some might argue that the fundamental conflict in post-war British politics is not so much between left and right as between those who believe that Britain's future lies with Europe and those who believe it does not» [1].

In 1984, M. Thatcher corrected what was seen as an injustice, negotiating a permanent rebate for Britain on its EC contributions, because it received much less in agricultural subsidies than some other countries, notably France [3]. During that period of time the UK was the third-poorest nation in the Community, but it was paying a lot more into the budget than other members due to its relative lack of farms. As a result, the UK reduced its contribution to the budget from more than 20 percent of the total in the 1980s to approximately 12 percent.

The 1980s saw a growing divide between Britain and Brussels, where the socialist J. Delors had taken the helm at the European

Commission and was steering towards a more federal Europe and a single currency.

Mrs. Thatcher was uncompromising. Her 1988 speech in Bruges, in which she rejected «a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels», has become a seminal text for Eurosceptics [4]. But, with many Europhiles in her cabinet (far more than nowadays), her stance fuelled the Conservatives' internal warfare, and helped lead eventually to her downfall.

«Black Wednesday» was one of the lowest points in Britain's relationship with Europe. After failing to fend off intense currency speculation, Chancellor of the Exchequer N. Lamont was forced to announce Britain's withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism on 16 September, 1992. Mrs. Thatcher had been unable to stop Europe's march towards political union, and was gone by the time the Maastricht Treaty was signed by her successor J. Major in 1992. This involved huge transfers of power to the new European Union. Britain secured opt-outs from the single currency and the social chapter. But to the treaty's critics - including many Tory rebels - it undermined the British tradition of the inviolable sovereignty of parliament [1].

T. Blair followed a landslide election victory in 1997 by quickly patching things up with Europe. He signed Britain up to the social chapter, delivering some of the social protections long coveted on the left, and setting his sights on the euro. But Britain's economy was doing well, support for euro entry was not widespread, and Chancellor G. Brown put the plans on hold.

The incoming Labour government in 1997 was more European in its outlook than its predecessor. He arrived strong and with a modernizing agenda that seemed to put Europe at the heart of Britain as much as the other way round. T. Blair was the first prime minister from the post-war generation. New Labour was built on respect for German social policy and French economic success. He spoke French well and had already established some good relationships on the continent, notably with

H. Kohl. A positive approach to Europe was part of Blair's party platform. In the year of his premiership, steps were taken towards the Lisbon Treaty, which was conceived for reforming and modernizing the European Union. Blair actively advocated the expansion of the European Union at the expense of a dozen of new countries admitted to the bloc in the mid-2000s. At the same time, at the end of his tenure at the head of the British cabinet, T Blair stated that he was going to fight the «dragon of European federalism». The foreign policy of Blair's cabinet has brought discord to the chorus of European politicians. Having found a common language with the administration of President Bush, Britain took a position close to the US on the issue of a military invasion of Iraq, which was in contradiction with the positions of France and Germany [8]. The closeness of Britain to Washington has always been and remains a subject of controversy over the question of the Kingdom's membership in the EU, both on the part of British politicians and European neighbors.

The debate over Britain's participation in the single European currency continues throughout Blair's premiership. As the commentators point out, in his government there were both supporters and opponents of the idea. That is why the attitude of the British authorities to the euro has also changed day by day: the rejection of the pound has always remained a too heavy political issue for the British cabinet.

The finance minister in the Blair government, G. Brown, proposes an economic check on five counts before deciding to join the euro. In June 2003, the British Ministry of Finance is reporting: the country is not ready to join the euro. After the entry of G. Brown into the post of prime minister, the talks about participation in the euro are gradually disappearing as the new prime minister does not force the discussion due to the crisis situation in European finances. G. Brown was closer to American thinking and more distant from Europe, compared to Blair. In major issues with foreign policy complications, he paid close attention to both the United States and the EU, especially regarding the deregulation of the Bank of England, the Welfare to Work program, and his response to the worldwide financial crisis at the G20 summit in London in 2009 [6].

G. Brown's reaction to the great 2008 banking crisis was much more pro active than France or Germany, and in many ways resembled the Bush policies in Washington. Brown's goals were to provide more liquidity to the financial system, to recapitalize the banks and to guarantee bank debt. He lowered the VAT to encourage consumer spending and to keep the economy from sinking

The Conservatives claimed credit for the upswing, promising to keep taxes low and reduce the deficit as well as promising an In/Out referendum on the UK's relationship with the European Union. The rival

Labour party called for a higher minimum wage, and higher taxes on the rich. In Scotland, the SNP attacked the austerity program, opposed nuclear weapons and demanded that promises of more autonomy for Scotland made during the independence referendum be delivered.

In 2011 D. Cameron became the first UK prime minister to veto a EU treaty [7]. In early 2013 he gave a much-anticipated speech in which he highlighted the challenges facing Europe and promised to renegotiate membership in the EU if his Conservative Party won a majority in the next general election. At the same time, support was growing among British nation for the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and its policy against the EU.

After winning reelection in May 2015, D. Cameron started the process of renegotiating the UK-EU relationship, putting on the list such issues as changes in migrant welfare payments, financial safeguards and easier ways for Britain to block EU regulations. In February 2016 he made public the results of the negotiations, and set June 23 as the date of the national referendum.

On 23 June 2016 UK voters elected to withdraw from the European Union by a thin margin (48% in favour of remaining, 52% in favour of leaving the European Union). London, Scotland, and Northern Ireland were three regions most in favour of the «Remain» vote, while Wales and England's northern region were strongly pro - «Leave». Although he called for the referendum, British Prime Minister D. Cameron had campaigned ardently for the «Remain» vote. He faced significant opposition from other parties on the right who came to view British membership in the EU as a detriment to the country's security and economic vitality. United Kingdom Independence Party leader N. Farage called the vote Britain's «independence day», despite the fact that the UK was already an independent sovereign country [7].

Brexit had a few immediate consequences. Hours after the results of the referendum, D. Cameron announced that he would resign as Prime Minister, claiming that «fresh leadership» was needed. In addition, because Scottish voters were highly in favour of remaining in the EU, Scotland's First Minister N. Sturgeon announced that the Scottish government would begin to organize another referendum on the question of Scottish independence. On the economic side of things, the value of the British pound declined sharply after the results of the election were made clear. Stock markets in both Britain and New York were down the day after the referendum. Oil prices also fell.

In October 2016, T May who replaced D. Cameron as British Prime Minister, announced her intention to invoke Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, formally notifying about Britain's intent to leave the EU. On March 29, 2017 the order, signed by May a day earlier, was delivered to the Council of the European Union, officially starting the two-year countdown to Britain's EU departure, now tentatively set for March 30, 2019 [7].

The main reasons and key factors that made British nation vote in favor of leaving the EU might be the following: economic, political and social. First of all, the instability and stagnation of European economy over the last years convinced the Brits to review their attitude to the organization which failed to deal with the consequences of economic crisis of 2008. This referendum proves British readiness to overcome several economic problems possible after withdrawal as the country will lose its preferences and influence in trade relations with other European states to some extent.

Another reason has social background and refers mostly to problems with nationalism manifestations all over the world including the UK. People lose their confidence in the efficient work of such international organizations as the IMF, NATO and EU as well. Observing such problems as immigration crisis British citizens doubt the necessity of being a member of the European Union as it usually leads to outbreaks of violations in the society and creates more conflicts inside the country.

So, the process of British integration into the common European community was and still is very tough and complicated. It experienced the waves of improving and deteriorating relations but nowadays the parties face the biggest number of challenges. Due to the last changes in political statuses if the participants within the European Union are likely to consider the process of British integration turned into the British exiting the organization and the beginning of general disintegration of EU.

Resources and literature

european union kingdom policy

1. Britain and the EU: A long and rocky relationship [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-26515129

2. Britain since 1945. Labour and the welfare state (1945-51) [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://www.brrtannica.com/place/United-Krngdom/Brrtarn-srnce-1945

3. Is Britain more European than it thunks? [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://www.historytoday.com/james-enison/britain-more - european-it-thinks

4. Margaret Thatcher Speech to the College of Europe («The Bruges Speech») [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://www. margaretthatcher. org/do cument/107332

5. Mr Winston Churchill speaking in Zurich I9th September 1946 [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://www.churchill-society - london. org.uk/astonish. html

6. `The blind leading the blind'? London's response to the 1969 crisis [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://www.historyireland.com/20th - century-contemporary-history/the-blind-leading-the-blind-londons-response-to - the-1969-crisis/

7. The History Behind Brexit [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://www.history.com/news/the-history-behind-brexit

8. Толстухина А. Внешняя политика Великобритании: роль и перспективы содружества / А. Толстухина II Соврем. Европа. - 2013. - ? 1. - С. 76-86.

Размещено на Allbest.ru