Journal of European Integration History – Revue d'histoire de l'

More documents

Recommendations

Info

104Fernando GuiraoIIt is indisputable that the Franco regime impeded Spain's EEC membership.According to article 237 of the EEC Treaty membership required the unanimousfavourable vote of the Council of Ministers and parliamentary ratification by allmembers. It was unlikely that Franco Spain would have passed happily throughboth procedures. The opposition to Spain’s membership did not come solely fromabroad, but also from inside the régime itself. When Madrid was forced to adopt afinal position towards the EEC after the British cabinet had made public its desireto enter the Community and the so-called Brussels negotiations for the first EECenlargement opened in the autumn of 1961, any possible participation in the differentstructures of economic integration was conditional upon the maintenance ofSpain's institutional distinctiveness. 5The liability that the Franco regime created for Spain at first was not determinant,because the official intention was to halt the implementation of the Treaty ofRome rather than to join the EEC. From the political viewpoint the conclusion ofthe so-called Messina negotiations frustrated Madrid. The European Coal and SteelCommunity (ECSC) was seen as no threat and all subsequent initiatives thatadopted the Schuman Plan model were pulled into the inter-governmental path, inwhich officials from Madrid were involved. More ambitious projects, such as theEuropean Defence Community and the European Political Community were deadand buried. Once Spain had initiated negotiations for association with the OEEC,the Treaty of Rome implied a blow to the Spanish government's belief that it hadreached a stage where it could envisage an almost full participation in Europeaneconomic bodies. 6 Not surprisingly, then, Spain's active policy towards the EECwas based on the concept of an OEEC-wide free trade area.It was only at the time of formalising Spain's relations with the EEC that thepolitical liability that the Franco regime represented became determinant. The governmentdid not request an association agreement, for fear of rejection. It asked forthe opening of bilateral negotiations for the EEC to establish the most convenientprocedure for putting forward the country's most urgent needs.Compared to other association requests, the Spanish one was very ambiguous. Itis true that the Spanish application included the following sentence: “The territorialcontinuity of my country with the Community and the contribution that its geographicalsituation can make in favour of European cohesion are the reasons thatlead my Government to request an association which may in due time be transformedinto full integration.” The letter opened, however, with the following state-5. Franco's speech in Burgos, 2 October 1961, as reproduced in Pensamiento político de Franco. Antología,Madrid 1975, p. 631.6. For the Spanish perception of the future of economic cooperation following the steps of the ECSCsee, Historical Archive of the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Renewed Section), Madrid(MAE), file (Leg.) 3449, folder (exp.) 39: “Informe sobre situación actual de la CECA y sobre susperspectivas dentro del movimiento global de integración europea”, Strasbourg, 5 February 1955;and ibid., exp. 34: Ambassador to Minister of Foreign Affairs, “Nuevas iniciativas de integración europea”,Paris, 30 April 1955.
Association or Trade Agreement? 105ment: “I have the honour to request (...) the opening of negotiations aimed at studyingthe possible connection of my country with the [EEC] in the manner whichmay be more convenient for our mutual interests.” 7 An intended strategy wasbehind this ambiguity.By December 1961 the Spanish government had decided to propose some institutionalrapprochement with the EEC. 8 For this, the official requests presented bythe United Kingdom, Denmark and Ireland for membership, and by Austria,Greece, Sweden and Switzerland for association, were looked at with attention.The experience of these countries led officials to reject the idea of listing particulardemands. From the Greek application, officials took the idea of not mentioning thearticle of the Treaty of Rome to which they should have properly referred, either237 for accession or 238 for association. A first draft however explicitly mentioneda request for association which was presented as Spain's “most convenient link tothe EEC”. In a second draft the draftees saw no need to refer to either of the abovementionedarticles, since they considered that negotiations would lead to the mostsuitable formula. 9 The final official request opted for the ambiguous course as themost suitable strategy: a clear-cut association request was not put forward althoughit was the preferred formula. 10 Minister Castiella presented association only as apossibility. 11 The person in charge of handing the request to Couve de Murvillerecalls it as a means of “opening a negotiation process which could lead to a commercialtreaty.” 12The ambiguity expressed in the official request could appease the Francoregime's opponents by allowing them to concentrate their heavy weaponry on vetoingany prospect of association, while allowing negotiations in the commercial7. MAE, Leg. 25091, exp. 4: Minister of Foreign Affairs Fernando María Castiella y Maíz to MauriceCouve de Murville, President of the EEC Council of Ministers and France's Minister of Foreign Affairs,9 February 1962. This text was drafted at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and approved by theComisión Delegada del Gobierno para Asuntos Económicos, a sort of Cabinet Committee for EconomicAffairs, on 2 February 1962; see minutes at the Central Archive of the Ministry of the Presidency,Madrid (ACMP), box 2809. After introducing some cosmetic changes, the official applicationwas dated 9 February 1962; see annex for full text.8. The US Secretary of State Dean Rusk was so informed by Franco and Minister Castiella; PublicRecord Office, London, FO 371/160764: British Ambassador to FO, “Visit of Mr Dean Rusk toSpain”, Madrid, 18 December 1961 (based upon information given by the US Chargé d'Affaires).9. MAE, Leg. 9389, exp. 25: “Primer proyecto de carta: en el que se cita la fórmula de asociación”, 2February 1962, and “Segundo proyecto de carta: en el que no se cita fórmula alguna, ni de asociaciónni de adhesión” [2 February 1962].10. Both the Comisión Delegada and the Council of Ministers had agreed on 19 and 26 January 1962,respectively, to request the association; ACMP, boxes 2809 and 3007 for the respective minutes.The working party established to prepare future negotiations with the EEC managed to draft aProyecto Definitivo de Acuerdo de Asociación (using as a basis of discussion both the Treaty ofRome and the Greek Association Agreement) by the time of launching Spain´s official application;MAE, Leg. 9390, exp. 5: Minutes of 9 February 1962.11. MAE, Leg. 10086, exp. 3: Castiella to Ambassador in Athens, 9 February 1962.12. The Spanish Ambassador in Paris, Jose María de AREILZA, A lo largo del siglo 1909-1991, Barcelona1992, p. 157. Mr Areilza does not mention association in his earlier memoirs, Memorias exteriores1947-1964, Barcelona 1984.
Page 6:
4Introductory note - Introduction -
Page 9 and 10:
Dieses Dokument wurde erstellt mit
Page 11 and 12:
Challenge to the Community 91961. T
Page 13 and 14:
Challenge to the Community 11cellor
Page 15 and 16:
Challenge to the Community 13widesp
Page 17 and 18:
Challenge to the Community 15about
Page 19 and 20:
Challenge to the Community 17undoub
Page 21 and 22:
Challenge to the Community 19period
Page 23 and 24:
Challenge to the Community 21concer
Page 25 and 26:
Challenge to the Community 23partia
Page 27 and 28:
Challenge to the Community 25of-pay
Page 29 and 30:
Challenge to the Community 27ment b
Page 31 and 32:
Challenge to the Community 29With r
Page 33 and 34:
Challenge to the Community 31The Au
Page 35 and 36:
Challenge to the Community 33nauer
Page 37 and 38:
Dieses Dokument wurde erstellt mit
Page 39 and 40:
Industrial Interest in West Germany
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56: Industrial Interest in West Germany
Page 65 and 66: Dieses Dokument wurde erstellt mit
Page 67 and 68: Swedish Neutrality, the Finland Arg
Page 85 and 86: The Diplomacy of ‘dignified calm
Page 105: Dieses Dokument wurde erstellt mit
Page 109 and 110: Association or Trade Agreement? 107
Page 125 and 126: Book reviews - Comptes rendus - Buc
Page 137 and 138: Notices - Informations - Mitteilung
Page 141 and 142: Abstracts - Résumés - Zusammenfas
Page 147 and 148: Annual subscription: 75 - DM /1500-
show all

Journal of European Integration History – Revue d'histoire de l'

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?