Die Außen- und Deutschlandpolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1966 - 1969 (German Edition)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Die Außen- und Deutschlandpolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1966 - 1969 (German Edition) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Die Außen- und Deutschlandpolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1966 - 1969 (German Edition) book. Happy reading Die Außen- und Deutschlandpolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1966 - 1969 (German Edition) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Die Außen- und Deutschlandpolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1966 - 1969 (German Edition) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Die Außen- und Deutschlandpolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1966 - 1969 (German Edition) Pocket Guide.

This unilateral action by the French in November displeased the other EEC members and effectively ended the negotiations. German politicians like Erhard felt that Hallstein and his commission had not done enough to promote the wider free trade area. The six countries of the EEC had decided on a customs union : they agreed to remove tariffs between one another within a period of twelve years, and to erect a common tariff barrier between themselves and other countries.

Die Außen- und Deutschlandpolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1966 - 1969 (German Edition)

Seven of the excluded European countries United Kingdom, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, Austria, and Portugal responded with an alternative free trade area, EFTA, which also removed tariff barriers between each other, but did not insist on a tariff barrier with other countries. Hallstein, as president of the EEC Commission, was cautious, considering the British application premature.

It was in that de Gaulle proposed the Fouchet Plan , a plan for an intergovernmental "union of states", as an alternative to the European Communities. There was little support from the other European countries, and negotiations were abandoned on 17 April While Hallstein had a decidedly federal vision for Europe, and regarded the Commission as a quasi-federal organ, [81] de Gaulle's vision was of a confederation. De Gaulle also envisaged a pooling of sovereignty in certain areas, such as external defence, harmonization of industrial production and foreign trade, currency, exploitation of resources in overseas territories, and cultural and scientific development, [83] but at the same time he was developing the French nuclear deterrent capability, the Force de Frappe , which he envisaged as part of a European defence capability independent of the United States.

The Hallstein Commission drew up plans and a timetable for an economic and currency union , and Hallstein presented these to the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament in October A second attempt by de Gaulle to establish a closer political union in Europe that would be independent of the United States was the Franco-German bilateral treaty on political cooperation. Hallstein and other members of the Commission also criticized the treaty, and this angered de Gaulle. Since Britain had firmly expressed its unwillingness to support an autonomous European defence independent of America, de Gaulle regarded the treaty as a failure.

The Council of Ministers instructed the Commission to submit plans by 1 April on how to finance the Common Agricultural Policy as from July , including its financing from direct levies rather than national contributions; this would entail a transfer of revenues to the Community. The French government stated it could not agree to this.

Sources et bibliographie

Since the legislation would increase not only the Commission's powers, but also the Parliament's, Hallstein had the support of the Parliament, which had long been campaigning for more powers. Before the proposals were presented to the Council , they became public, and Hallstein then presented them to the European Parliament on 24 March, a week before presenting them to the Council.

http://panel.hipwee.com/32899-cell-snapchat.php

„Walter Ulbricht - das sind wir alle“

When Hallstein put forward his proposals, the Council was already concerned. After discussions between France and Germany, a compromise was at first reached, postponing implementation of the agricultural levies until , [91] but at the Council meeting of 28 June the Netherlands foreign minister, Joseph Luns , and his Italian counterpart, Amintore Fanfani , insisted that all of the Commission's proposals should be discussed as a package.

The Committee of Permanent Representatives of the foreign ministers produced a report recommending a compromise by making both the agricultural levies and the customs duties available to be used for Community purposes but not centralizing the process; however, Hallstein refused to broker this deal, and suggested employing the common practice of " stopping the clock " until the issue could be resolved.


  • Chronik: Bundestagswahlen von 1949 bis 2002?
  • Salem West Virginia 1776 ~ 1976.
  • Against the Grain!

Under pressure from Couve de Murville , who was the rotating President of the Council at the time, Hallstein agreed, on 30 June , to work out a compromise. The same day, however, after consulting with de Gaulle, Couve de Murville announced that no agreement had been reached by the agreed deadline and that the negotiations had failed. France's presidency of the Council, which rotated every six months, terminated on 30 June A few days later, on de Gaulle's instructions, France ceased participation in all meetings of the Council of Ministers and the Council of Permanent Representatives that dealt with any new decisions.

Participation in many working groups ceased, and the French Permanent Representative to the EU, Jean-Marc Boegner was recalled, together with 18 high-ranking civil servants and diplomats. In an attempt to resolve the situation, Hallstein, together with Marjolin , the French vice-president of the Commission, drew up a new plan, continuing the provisional arrangement for agricultural finances until 1 January This proposal was presented to the Council on 22 June De Gaulle, however, remained confrontational toward Hallstein and the Brussels " technocrats ". In September , he publicly declared his opposition to majority voting and the political role of the Commission.

On 20 October Couve de Murville, in the National Assembly , pushed for a revision of the treaties; this was opposed by the other five member states. At the Council meeting of 25 to 26 October they passed a resolution stating that a solution "must be found within the provisions of the existing treaties". Following the French presidential elections on 5 November and 19 December , de Gaulle accepted this offer. In January , the six foreign ministers agreed to suggest to the Commission that the Permanent Representatives of the ministers should be consulted before making any major proposals and not to publish such proposals before they had been dealt with by the Council of Ministers.

This became known as the Luxembourg Compromise. When the "Empty Chair Crisis" was finally resolved, it had lasted from 30 June to 29 January When the French foreign minister Couve de Murville returned to the negotiating table after Hallstein's official term of office in January , he insisted on Hallstein's departure and the nomination of someone else to be the head of the new commission, which would in future be the commission shared by all three communities when the EEC, the ECSC, and Euratom were merged.

Since there was no agreement on a replacement for Hallstein when his term ended on 8 January , he remained in office as a caretaker based on Article of the EEC Treaty. This also meant that the planned merger of the three communities, which was to have taken place on 1 January , was postponed. In view of the confrontation with de Gaulle, there was a proposal that Hallstein should be nominated for a further term but that he should serve for only six months. The German Chancellor, Georg Kiesinger agreed to this compromise, but Hallstein considered this was a breach of the Treaty [] and on 5 May he asked not to be re-nominated at all.

In this way, the national governments had refused to accept the commission becoming a European executive, blocking Hallstein's vision of a United States of Europe. De Gaulle recognized Hallstein's service to the European idea, but attributed it to German patriotism, serving the interests of Germany, enabling Germany to re-attain a respect and status in Europe that it had lost because of Hitler.

De Gaulle resented the status that Hallstein, for him a mere technocrat, was accorded by foreign states. He was ardently wedded to the thesis of the super-State, and bent all his skilful efforts towards giving the Community the character and appearance of one.

He had made Brussels, where he resided, into a sort of capital. There he sat, surrounded with all the trappings of sovereignty, directing his colleagues, allocating jobs among them, controlling several thousand officials who were appointed, promoted and remunerated at his discretion, receiving the credentials of foreign ambassadors, laying claim to high honors on the occasion of his official visits, concerned above all to further the amalgamation of the Six, believing that the pressure of events would bring about what he envisaged.

According to Der Spiegel , De Gaulle's complaints included []. On the political role of the Commission, Hallstein stated in an interview with Der Spiegel. In principle, we have no political competences The Common Market has the goal of unifying Europe politically. The issue that triggered the Empty Chair Crisis was the financing of the common agricultural policy, which was of critical interest to France: from to , France had received 46 million US dollars from the agricultural fund, eighty-five per cent of all revenue.

The clash between Hallstein and de Gaulle demonstrated a clash between two opposing visions of Europe. On most of these issues, de Gaulle regarded Hallstein as an opponent. Hallstein's response to de Gaulle's attacks was also somewhat confrontational, comparing de Gaulle's actions with those of Hitler. Hallstein left the Commission at the end of , aged On 20 January , Hallstein was elected president of the European Movement , a private organization founded in as the umbrella organization of various organizations in favour of European integration, [] where he continued to promote his vision of a "United States of Europe".

In the run-up to the federal elections in , Helmut Kohl , then minister-president and head of the CDU in the state of Rhineland Palatinate offered Hallstein the opportunity of standing as a direct candidate in the Neuwied constituency in the Westerwald area and heading up the CDU party list in the state of Rhineland Palatinate. Hallstein had little personal contact with his constituency, the work being done mainly by his assistant Christian Franck.

At the next elections in , he was not re-nominated. He also spoke out in favour of direct election of the European Parliament in Germany. At that time, the members of the European Parliament were delegated by the Bundestag, and direct election was not introduced until Having left the Bundestag in and the presidency of the European Movement in , Hallstein retired from active political life but continued to write and give talks.

He moved from his country house in the Westerwald to Stuttgart, and continued his work as an author.

Sixty Years of the Federal Republic of Germany - Fondation Pierre du Bois

Hallstein fell ill in early [] and died in Stuttgart on 29 March , at the age of Hallstein remained a bachelor all his life. Central to Hallstein's ideas on Europe was his vision of a federal Europe. He called European integration a "revolutionary endeavour" [] that would take a long time. Hallstein spoke early in favour of the proposed European Defence Community , which never came to fruition, and of West German's integration in the West, which he saw as necessary for the solution of other problems, including German reunification. In a speech in , in London, Hallstein talked of three "dimensions" of European integration: [].

He spoke of a trade-off between the different dimensions, for instance: the larger the number of members, the less integration would be possible in a given time. His model included the coexistence of different European organizations of differing size and with differing degrees of integration. Though Hallstein first pursued the goal of economic integration, he stated that this was not an end in itself but was a means of achieving a political union that "pool[ed] all the appropriate functions of the member-states.

The Schuman Plan was the first step, applied to the field of economics; the next step was to be defence; these would then necessarily lead to integration in the related fields of industrial relations and social policy, energy policy and foreign policy. Hallstein strove for a Europe based on the rule of law "law in place of force". A lawyer and an expert in international law, Hallstein saw a strong legal foundation as essential. The problems that the United States experienced were, in his view, due partly to the states defending their sovereignty.

He rejected the concept of the unitary nation state favoured by the French, in favour of a federal solution, and concluded that Europe should follow the American path towards a federal solution.

Gunter Minnerup, East Germany’s Frozen Revolution, NLR I/, March–April

People who knew Hallstein described him as someone with keen intellect, an excellent command of language, and his reliability. He was also awarded numerous other honours and prizes. The documented total number of publications by Hallstein exceeds Hallstein's major popular work was Der unvollendete Bundesstaat [The Unfinished Federation], which was first published in []. This book can be seen as Hallstein's political testament.

admin