Britain is widely regarded as the ' awkward partner ' in Europe. How accurate is this assessment? - publié le 27/03/2007

Résumé du document

“We have our own dreams and our own tasks. We are in Europe, but not part of it. We are linked, but not combined. We are interested and associated, but not integrated.”

Winston Churchill's famous quote aptly describes Britain's approach to European integration since the inception of the European Union in the 1950s. Churchill emphasized that although he was ‘not opposed to a European Federation', he ‘never thought that Britain or the British Commonwealth should become an integral part.' Churchill's attitude towards the European Union has been imitated by many of the Prime Ministers that followed him. Britain's relationship towards European integration has generally been a reluctant union, supporting free trade and mutually beneficial cooperation, while attempting to distance itself from economic and cultural ‘unity' within Europe. In the same way, Keynes wrote in 1919: “England still stands outside Europe. Europe's voiceless tremors do not reach England. Europe is apart and England is not a part of it.” This statement also highlights the fact that by the end of the First World War, Britain was considered to be “in Europe but not part of Europe”.

After World War Two, Britain saw Europe as a liability, insofar as its special relations with the USA provided it more prestige. Nevertheless, in 1973, Britain joined the Union. But, only a year after being accepted into the European Union, Britain was regarded as an “awkward partner”, a reputation that still remains today. However, after more than thirty years it can still be described as the “awkward partner”. Britain remains out of the EMU whereas most of European States already belong to the Euro zone. The Constitution was also rejected whereas Spain and Germany accepted it. Britain keeps being one of the most important State that seems to slow the integration down, and above all its supranational position.

Extraits

[...] British ‘exceptionalism' in Europe runs through a number of matters such as EU integration, external relations with third countries and the organisation of the capitalist and market economies in monetary, fiscal or labour matters (i.e., Britain exhibits a more liberal market oriented outlook compared with the social democratic, social market continental economies). Since its beginnings as an EC member state, Britain was branded the ‘reluctant', the ‘awkward' and certainly the euro-sceptic partner, whose commitment to Europe was always questionable. Britain often challenged the motives of the EU and acted against the prospect of a supranational entity, fearing that it could dominate British national interests. [...]

[...] you can't beat them, join and that was exactly what Britain did when it realized there was no escape from interdependence pressures anymore. In fact joining was seen as an attempt to try and control these pressures. The European challenge was however far from over. In fact, this was only the beginning of an unprecedented political challenge. In 1974 Wilson was back and with him a new Atlanticism fearful of the European undemocratic “capitalist club” that he now believed was a cause for a loss of economic management power. [...]

[...] Britain is widely regarded as the awkward partner in Europe. How accurate is this assessment? have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not combined. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed.” Winston Churchill's famous quote aptly describes Britain's approach to European integration since the inception of the EU in the 1950's. Churchill emphasised that although he was opposed to a European Federation', he ‘never thought that Britain or the British Commonwealth should become an integral part.' Churchill's attitude towards the EU has been imitated by many of the Prime Ministers that followed him. [...]

[...] European Union codified legal law the absence of a written constitution tradition and its “conception of democracy that favours strong, majority government without mediation” colliding with EU conceptions); both Labour and the Conservatives usually reached a certain consensus and strongly embodied national concerns while remaining divided over European issues. Whatever the reasons may be, to what extent can Britain be regarded as the “awkward partner”? In other words, to what extent Britain's European behaviour is different from other members' behaviour? It is often assumed that Britain is different from the rest of its EU partners with an idiosyncratic and “patriotic” outlook. [...]

[...] Until this cycle is broken, Britain's status as the awkward partner of Europe looks set to continue. Nowadays, many of the new member countries could also be seen as “awkward partners”. In a style reminiscent of Britain's Conservative prime ministers, heads of government of these countries often present themselves as “defenders” against a Franco-German plot. Maybe it would mean that Britain could be no longer regarded as the only awkward partner? (2477 words) Bibliography - Black, J. [...]