Wednesday, November 23, 2016

British View of European Union: A Different Approach

After the Second World War, the economic and social situation in Europe was severe because of the great destruction caused by the war. European states collaborated in order to rebuild their economies: the Marshall Plan, the Bank of Basel and other institutions were created or developed to increase cooperation between the countries of Western Europe. The communist bloc, directed by the Soviet Union, developed their own alternative cooperation through different plans and associations. The countries most affected by the postwar crisis were the European states that suffered in the war more significantly than countries in other parts of the world. Even the victorious contenders, such as the British, experienced difficulties in their postwar economies with several restrictions lasting several years after the conflict.

The post-war crisis in the United Kingdom had important consequences in international affairs as it changed the previous international establishment and a new world order was created. The country which was once the most important and powerful empire ever built by humanity lost its leading position in the world affairs to new world powers, the USA and the USSR. The transfer of power was a direct consequence of the Second World War because the conflict made the US and the Soviet Union stronger, and at the same time weakened the UK.

It took time for the UK to adapt to the new international situation and understand the new world and the new role of the British in international affairs, mostly as a loyal ally of the US rather than an independent international political force acting exclusively according to British national interests. Obviously there was a link between the national interests of the US and the UK because of the common values shared by both states, such as a political system based on democracy (even though USA is a republic and UK a monarchy), an economic system based on free market, on capitalism with some emphasis on the financial markets, or the language, and other cultural aspects that allowed a smooth transition from British dominance in world affairs to American leadership. These links are still strong and make the relation between the British and North Americans very close.

Nevertheless, there had been many occasions where the interest of both countries was not the same and hence the predominance of the US was shown in all its power forcing the British to readapt or reconduct its actions following the American interest. In the period after the Second World War, the best example was the crisis of the Suez Canal, in which French and British troops had to negotiate and withdraw from Egypt because of the American protection of Nasser as a key ally in the Cold War in the Arab countries.

The special relation between the US and the UK also created tensions between the French and the British, as France felt betrayed by the British acceptance of American predominance. The independence of European colonies during the postwar years was also an expression of the same international situation in a world dominated by two new powers, the US and the Soviet Union, where the former colonial powers just step aside unable to compete with the huge resources of both states in the context of the Cold War between them.


To give an example, Vietnam, previously a French colony, where France had fought a long war against the local independence, became a scenario of violent combats between capitalist forces lead by the USA and local Communists, armed and counseled by the Soviet Union. France was simply powerless to play in the same division because it could not match the capacities of the new world powers. The process of decolonization was the scenario of numerous conflicts between the USA and the USSR, where in the best of cases the European powers were assisting one of the contenders. Hence Europe was in a clear decline in international affairs, previously dominated by European powers for centuries.

No comments: