1. Bromund (2001), p. 77.
2. Grob-Fitzgibbon (2016), pp. 210-12.
3. Ibid.
4. Cited in Bromund (2001), p. 81.
5. See Kaiser (1996), Moravcsik (1998), Schaad (1998), Ellison (2000).
6. Camps (1964), p. 102.
7. Lynch (2000), Warlouzet (2008).
8. Kaiser (1996), Ellison (2000), Camps (1964), Warlouzet (2011).
9. As we saw in the previous chapter the European Communities had since 1967 brought together the ECSC, the EEC and EURATOM. The European Community, on the other hand, is the name given to the EEC under the Treaty of Maastricht from 1993 onwards (see Chapter 8).
10. Finland was also involved in the discussions. However, the latter state was not even a member of the OEEC, and given its relationship with the Soviet Union would have to content itself with associate membership of EFTA, beginning in 1961.
11. Kaiser (1996), pp. 101–7.
12. Young (1993), p. 67.
13. Urwin (1995), pp. 117–20.
14. Hennessy (2006), p. 615.
15. Camps (1964), Kaiser (1996).
16. Camps (1964), p. 336.
17. Catterall (ed.) (2011), p. 313.
18. Grob-Fitzgibbon (2016), pp. 271, 278, 285.
19. Grob-Fitzgibbon (2016), p. 290.
20. For a recent discussion see Jackson (2018), pp. 584–94.
21. Grob-Fitzgibbon (2016), p. 288; the citation is my translation. The original reads: ‘un autre marché commun … celui qu’on bâtirait à onze. Et puis à treize. Et puis peut-être à dix-huit … Il est à prévoir que la cohésion de tous ses membres qui seraient très nombreux, très divers n’y résisterait pas longtemps. Et qu’en définitive il apparaîtrait une Communauté atlantique colossale sous dépendance et direction américaine.’ The text of the 14 January 1963 press conference is available, inter alia, at https://www.les-crises.fr/les-deux-veto-du-general-de-gaulle-a-langleterre/.
22. Moravcsik (1998, 2000a, 2000b).
23. The four countries had submitted membership applications in 1967, and had again been vetoed by de Gaulle. On this occasion, however, their applications had remained dormant, rather than being withdrawn.
24. Rae et al. (2006).
25. As a result, aged ten, I and my family moved, not to Oslo, where an Irish embassy would have been opened had the vote gone the other way, but to Brussels, arriving there on April Fool’s Day 1973.
26. The words are those of the Labour Party’s National Executive Committee, from 1962: see Grob-Fitzgibbon (2016), p. 293. Not only was Europe less multiracial than the Commonwealth, it was also largely Catholic, and British socialists could be just as susceptible to the ambient anti-Catholicism of the period as their conservative compatriots. Ernest Bevin, whom we have already met, shared the prejudice, as did his deputy at the Foreign Office, Kenneth Younger. While sympathetic to the Schuman Plan, Younger worried that it might ‘be just a step in the consolidation of the Catholic “black international”, which I have always thought to be a big driving force behind the Council of Europe’ (Young 1999, pp. 50–51). In fairness to Younger, it was surely significant that Christian Democrats were in government in all six founding member states during 1950–52. This transnational network ‘fulfilled multiple functions, not least creating political trust, deliberating policy, especially on European integration, marginalising internal dissent within the national parties, socialising new members into an existing policy consensus, coordinating government policy-making and facilitating Parliamentary ratification of integration treaties. These and other functions together provided crucial guarantees for the exercise of what political scientists have called entrepreneurial leadership by politicians like Robert Schuman and Konrad Adenauer, for example, by limiting their domestic political risks in a decisive way to facilitate bold and at times extremely controversial policy choices.’ In turn, these choices reflected a common project of middle-class Catholic elites ‘for creating an integrated Europe based on a curious mélange of traditional confessional notions of occidental culture and anti-communism and broadly liberal economic ideas’ (Kaiser 2007, pp. 9–10).
27. His speech is available online at https://www.cvce.eu/content/publication/1999/1/1/05f2996b-000b-4576-8b42-8069033a16f9/publishable_en.pdf.
28. Young (1999), p. 292.
29. Young (1999), p. 240.
30. Saunders (2018), p. 306.
31. Saunders (2018), pp. 123–4.