To mark the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Treaties of Rome, Agence EUROPE has dipped into its unparalleled archives and is republishing articles from 1957, 1967, 1977, 1987, 1997 and 2007 that reported on the celebrations of this event. EUROPE is also publishing the editorials of its own 'founding fathers', which analysed the match between the treaties and the challenges faced, decade by decade, in the European integration project.
See first instalment of our commemorative series: 1957 (see EUROPE 11748)
Background
On the 10th anniversary of the signing of the treaties establishing the European Economic Community (EEC) and EURATOM, Emmanuele Gazzo, the editor in chief at Agence Europe, takes stock: the process of economic integration in Europe, far from being perfect, requires a political leap of a federal nature. The issue of the United Kingdom becoming a member of the EEC is already being discussed.
EDITORIAL – TEN YEARS ON
In the history of humanity, it is only a fleeting moment, but in the current period of large-scale fast-paced development, ten years is a long time.
At 6.00pm on 25 March 1957, the treaties of the European Economic Community (EEC) and of the European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC or EURATOM) were signed in Rome, in the Horatii and Curiatii Room at the Capitol. We lived through those historic hours and we remember that, unlike what one might think today, the atmosphere was not one of euphoria. Instead, the awareness of having accomplished an act of exceptional historic significance aroused caution. One looked into the future while remembering the lessons of the past.
The interim Committee (an intergovernmental coordination body as opposed to an international organisation) which was created, while awaiting ratification of the treaties, had a very difficult task to accomplish, especially with regard to the rest of the world, which, with a few exceptions, did not show much sympathy for this new-born baby.
No less difficult a task awaited the political forces that had acted in favour of concluding the treaties: it was a case of overcoming the hostility that this newly launched political integration aroused in several circles, and that was encouraged by the political and economic development in some countries. The battle was only won at the end of 1957, when the ratifications of the three Benelux countries were in the bag.
This (10th) anniversary certainly inspires some soul-searching. It will provide the opportunity for some to show legitimate satisfaction. Others will feel disappointed and not very confident about the future. For others, the changes that have come about in the political context mean that what was created ten years ago is largely outdated and pretty much doomed: we can regret it or celebrate it, but we need to take note.
None of these analyses is entirely true or false, depending on one’s point of view; individual temperaments or preferences permit, therefore, that different conclusions be drawn. However, an objective examination of the whole should enable a few points to be fixed which are acceptable for all, and which are, rather than conclusions, subjects for reflection.
The first is that the 1957 treaties were designed and concluded according to a precise political objective: the creation of a single Europe politically, and of course also in the area of defence. The treaties formed the institutional and “economic base”. This objective has certainly not been achieved. The achievement of a European defence seems more fanciful today than the day the European Defence Community (EDC) was rejected (1954). Those who believed in an “automatism” to the transition are disappointed.
A second observation is, however, that despite the strengthening the centrifugal forces have undergone in the meantime, the process of economic integration calls ever more clearly and urgently for a need for progress in the political sphere. That this situation generates difficulties and crises should only be of surprise to those who believed that building Europe would be an easy enterprise. This is about – and this needs to be recognised – a revolution, and a painful revolution, which demands big sacrifices.
The third observation is that, overall, the process of economic union is taking place along the lines provided for by the Treaties. This confirms that the method and institutional system were and are appropriate. Here too, difficulties exist and crises occur. But the ideal city only exists in the “book of utopia”.
A fourth observation is that, over these last ten years, Europe has not been through any crises or even any real overarching recession. What would happen if a situation of serious economic crisis arose? Certain symptoms that can be seen where a crisis threatens (coal, and partly steel) are extremely worrying. This only confirms the need to move on towards the gradual creation of a real federal political power, which will be the only true and effective guarantee of irreversibility.
This, moreover, is the conclusion that we will draw today and that must inspire everybody’s action for the decade to come.
Emmanuele Gazzo
TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF SIGNING OF TREATIES: DISILLUSIONED COMMENTS AND SCEPTICISM ABOUT CHANCES OF POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS
BRUSSELS (EU), Tuesday 28 March 1967 – The tenth anniversary of the signing of the Treaties of Rome has given way to numerous statements, publications and studies, and has been talked about in meetings and congresses.
All commentators generally agree on recognising the importance of the path taken, but without feeding many illusions as to future political developments. Mr Gaetano Martino, foreign affairs minister and one of the signatories of the Treaties, when questioned by a journalist about the political “revival” of Europe that could take place at the Rome summit, replied that “the revival risks becoming a burial”; in order to avoid making a melancholic rite of it, a precise goal is needed, and this is what is missing.
Furthermore, Le Monde writes that is doubtful that the Rome summit can be held. Another newspaper, the Corriere della Sera, writes that no attempt at political revival can be planned as “General de Gaulle would like a Europe on its knees at his feet, and to force it to stay on its knees, he would like to prevent Great Britain from joining”. Another newspaper, Russian this time, the Izvestia, writes that the group of Six has not facilitated but, on the contrary, complicated the development of European collaboration. In the view of this newspaper, France, followed by other partners, has not wanted to become integrated in little Europe, fearing the economic power of vindictive Western Germany.
Among the messages published to mark this (10th) anniversary is that of Mr George Brown (British foreign secretary), who says: “It is our clear intention and resolve to join the Common Market”, and that of Mr Amintore Fanfani (Italian foreign minister), who would like enlargement to other democratic countries in Europe, with Great Britain top of the list. Mr Fanfani says that serious commitment will have to be made for political revival and strengthening the institutions, especially through the swift merging of executives; it is with this in mind that Italy has taken the initiative of a new meeting in Rome on 29 May 1967. The German Chancellor, Kurt Georg Kiesinger, confirmed that the big end-goal remained political union, equipped with a foreign policy that is first closely coordinated, then common.
It is interesting to note that one of the craftspeople of the Treaties of Rome, the secretary general at the Belgian Ministry of Economic Affairs, Baron Snoy et d’Oppuers, was questioned by a journalist and noted that the Council of Ministers, which had been designed “as an institution of collegial nature, or supranational, at least sufficiently fully-fledged European”, has turned out to be something else, and too quickly. The ministers have resumed their bad nationalist, narrow-minded or futile habits, which would moreover be at the origin of the greatest importance taken by the European Commission.
A meeting of the European socialist left
The socialist parties of the Six, plus Great Britain, gave a particularly loud and political nature to the celebration. They met in Paris under the chairmanship of Mr Lucien Radoux. The Labour party was represented by Sir Geoffrey de Freitas, the leader of the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe, who very much appreciated the statement made by Mr Mario Zagari, the Italian secretary of state for foreign affairs, according to whom: “the issue of British membership is, for the socialists, a point on which it is impossible to compromise… and it is important to underline the democratic nature that Great Britain will bring to the European integration process”.
Mr Francis Vals, the leader of the socialist group at the European Parliament highlighted the Community’s technocratic “deviation”, which is translated by the Council, not the Parliament, being allocated the decision-making power, and the uncontrolled management of an enormous budget (the EAGGF agricultural fund).
The conclusions of the meeting were drawn by Mr Guy Mollet, who strongly criticised the policy of the French government and expressed the disappointment felt after ten years. He also recalled that the Treaties were signed when he was president of the Council. In the opinion of Mr Guy Mollet, two positive elements emerge: the fact that the European Commission led by Walter Halstein has been able to cope with the attacks against it, and that a new authentic European personality is beginning to emerge.
As part of the celebrations of the tenth anniversary of the Treaties of Rome, a special European summit was held in Rome on 29 May 1967. Here, the leaders of the six founding countries decided to move ahead with merging the institutions of the three communities (ECSC, EEC and EURATOM) and they moved ahead to an exchange of views on the request for membership from Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom.
Key dates: