“Broker Or Brakeman?”: An Analysis Of Parliamentary Debates On Schuman Plan Between British Labour And Conservative Parties*

Fransız Dışişleri Bakanı Robert Schuman’ın Fransa ve Batı Almanya’nın kömür ve çelik rezervlerinin birleştirilmesini önermesi ve diğer Avrupa devletlerine de bu plana katılmaları için davet göndermesi ile 9 Mayıs 1950 Avrupa bütünleşmesi tarihinde bir dönüm noktası oldu. Aslında 1950 Mayıs’ının sonunda Britanya tarafından reddedilen Schuman Planı için düzenlenecek konferansa katılım daveti Britanya Parlamentosu gündemine 26 Haziran’da Muhafazakâr Parti’nin İşçi Partisi hükümetinin bu daveti kabulünü talep eden önergesiyle gelmiş. oldu. 26-27 Haziran’daki parlamento görüşmelerinin ardından The Economist dergisi bu görüşmelerin ele alındığı “Simsar mı Frenci mi?” başlık bir makale yayınladı. Makaleye göre bu dış politika konusunda “Muhalefet ve İktidar tutumları arasında belirgin olan görüş farklılıkları değil, benzerlikleriydi”. Her ne kadar bu argüman belirli bir dereceye kadar anlaşılabilir olsa da, bu çalışmada Britanya siyasi partilerinin hasımlığa dayanan yapısının yukarıda bahsi geçen parlamento görüşmelerinin genel çerçevesini belirlediği savunulmaktadır. Ayrıca, bu siyasi yapı Britanya karar alıcılarının Avrupa bütünleşmesi konusunda istisnacılık söylemleri ve politikalarını benimsemelerine ve nihayetinde Britanya’nın Schuman Planı dışında kalmasına katkıda bulunduğu belirtilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Schuman Planı, Britanya Muhafazakâr Partisi, Britanya İşçi Partisi, hasımlık, istisnacılık

“BROKER OR BRAKEMAN?”: AN ANALYSIS OF PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES ON SCHUMAN PLAN BETWEEN BRITISH LABOUR AND CONSERVATIVE PARTIES

9 May 1950 was a milestone in the history of European Integration when the French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman proposed the pooling of French and West German supplies of coal and steel; and made an invitation to other European states willing to be involved in this plan. The invitation for the conference on Schuman Plan came to the agenda of British Parliament on 26 June as a motion by Conservative Party demanding Labour Party Government to accept the invitation which had already been declined at the end of May, 1950. Following the debate on 26- 27 June, The Economist published an article titled “Broker or Brakeman?” in which the Schuman Plan discussions on British Parliament were explored. The Journal was arguing that “it is the resemblances, not the differences, between the outlook of Government and Opposition that are most striking” on this issue of foreign policy. Although this argument makes sense to a certain extent; this study argues that it was the adversarial nature of British party politics that shaped the general structure of the above mentioned parliamentary debate. Moreover, this nature contributed the decision makers to apply exceptionalist discourses and policies when it came to European Integration, therefore to a British non-involvement in the Plan.

Keywords:

Schuman Plan, British Conservative Party, British Labour Party, adversarialism, exceptionalism,

PDF

___

A. Primary Resources Hansard, 11 May 1950, vol. 475 column 588. Hansard, 13 June 1950, vol 476, column 36-37 Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1916. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1933. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1934. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1937. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1938. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1939. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1947. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1964. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1970. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1973. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 1977. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 2010. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 2013. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 2017. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 2021. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 2026 Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 2031. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 2034-2035. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 2037. Hansard, 26 June 1950, vol 476, column 2041. Hansard, 27 June 1950, vol 476, column 2107. Hansard, 27 June 1950, vol 476, column 2120. Hansard, 27 June 1950, vol 476, column 2157.
B. Secondary Resources Black 1994 Jeremy Black, Convergence or Divergence?: Britain and The Continent. London: Macmillan. Bullock 1985 Alan Bullock, Ernest Bevin. Foreign Secretary 1945. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Coxall and Robins 1998 Bill Coxall and Lynton Robins, British Politics Since the War. London: Macmillan Press. Dedman 2006 Martin Dedman, The Origins and Development of the European Union 1945-1995: A History of European Integration. Routledge, London-New York.
Deighton 1990 Anne Deighton, “Missing the boat: Britain and Europe 1945-61”, Contemporary British History, 3(3), p. 15-17. Dinan 1999 Desmond Dinan, Ever Closer Union: An Introduction to European Integration. Basingstoke, United Kingdom. Gowland et alii 2010 David Gowland, Arthur Turner and Alex Wright Britain and European Integration Since 1945 On the Sidelines, London: Routledge Hörber 2006 Thomas Hörber, The Foundation of Europe: European Integration Ideas in France, Germany and Britain in the 1950s. Heidelberg: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften Kaiser 1996 William Kaiser, Using Europe, Abusing the Europeans: Britain and European Integration, 1945-63. London: Macmillan. Kavanagh 1992 Denis Kavanagh, “The Postwar Consensus”, Twentieth Century British Politics, 3(2), p. 175-190. Lord 1998 Christopher Lord, “With, but not of: Britain and Schuman Plan, a Reinterpretation”. Journal of European Integration History, 4(2), p. 23-46. Marquand 1988 David Marquand, The Unprincipled Society. London: J.Cape Milward 1992 Alan Milward, The European Rescue of Nation State. London: Routledge. Nutting 1960 Anthony Nutting, Europe will not Wait. London: Hollis & Carter. Onslow 1997 Sue Onslow, Backbench Debate within the Conservative Party and its Influence on British Foreign Policy, 1948-57. London: Macmillan Press. Pimlott et alii 1989 Ben Pimlott, Denis Kavanagh and Peter Morris, “Is the ‘the postwar consensus’ a myth ?” Contemporary Record, 2(6), p. 12-15. Rose 1980 Richard Rose, Do parties make a difference ? London: The Macmillan Press Sham and Younger 1967 Ulrich Sham and Kenneth Younger, “Britain and Europe, 1950”, International Affairs, 43(1), p. 12-24. Smith and Aspinwall 2007 Mitchell Smith and Mark Aspinwall, “Institutions and Ambivalence: Party Management, Adversarialism and British Policy Toward Europe”, Current Politics and Economics of Europe, 19(3-4), p. 233-250. The Economist July 1 1950 The Economist , “Broker or Brakeman?” July 1, 1950; p. 3; Issue 5575. Urwin 2014 D. W. Urwin, The community of Europe: A history of European integration since 1945, Routledge. Warner 1996 Geoffrey Warner, “From ‘Ally to Enemy: Britain’s Relations with the Soviet Union, 1941-8” The Soviet Union and Europe in the Cold War, 1943-53, Palgrave Macmillan: London, p. 293-309 Wurm 1998 Clemens August Wurm, “Britain and European Integration, 1945–63”, Contemporary Euroepan History, 7(2), p. 249-261. Young 1993 John W. Young, Britain and European Unity, 1945-1992. New York: Macmillan.