The Twelfth Corbishley Memorial Lecture 1988
Peace and Democracy in Europe: The Role of the European Community
by Emile Noel

FOREWORD By Professor George Wedell

Having in 1987 considered the role of the British Commonwealth as a force for peace and understanding in the world, the Council of the Wyndham Place Trust decided in 1988 to make the consideration of the role of the European Community in the wider world the theme of the Corbishley Memorial Lecture.

We are once again fortunate in securing the best qualified lecturer to expound this theme. Monsieur Emile Noel, at present the President of the European University Institute in Florence, was Secretary General of the Commission of the European Communities from its creation until last year. He developed this executive instrument of European unification against all the odds into the remarkable institution it is today. Although always a meticulous public servant mindful of the political constraints under which the Commission has had to work, Emile Noel has maintained throughout his career the vision of the wider role of Europe contained in the Monnet-Schuman declaration with which he prefaces his lecture.

It is fitting that his stewardship of the Community’s conscience should have culminated in the Single European Act and the renewed dynamic that this has provided for the development of European integration. Monsieur Noel’s lecture illustrates the essential complementarity of National and European loyalties in the context of the wider world.

The Trustees are grateful to Professor Albert Kiralfy of King’s College, London, for checking the translation of Monsieur Noel’s lecture which was given in French.

Top

"World peace could not be safeguarded without creative efforts in proportion to the dangers which threaten all. The contribution that an organised and lively Europe could bring to civilisation is indispensable to the maintenance of peaceful relations. In making herself the champion of a united Europe France has always had, as her essential aim, the service of peace. In the absence of such a united Europe we have had war."

These were the opening sentences of the famous Monnet-Schuman declaration of 9^{th May, 1950 which was to set in motion the whole venture of the Communities. This passage is less known and less often quoted than other ‘classical’ formulae in the declaration. This is a pity because it expresses what was one of the most firmly rooted convictions of Jean Monnet that peace, peace in Europe, peace in the world was the ultimate aim of this whole European venture and its most profound justification.}

Democracy is not explicitly mentioned in the declaration of 9th May 1950, but it is in the background, present for all those involved at the time. Let’s go back to May 1950. It was only in the previous year that the democratic government of West Germany had been set up with, at its head, that extraordinary personality Konrad Adenauer, the man who was able to hold his head high during Nazism, and afterwards, with the same dignity, before the allied forces of occupation. What would be the future of this government, of the new German democracy? Would it reinforce and consolidate itself or would it, like the Weimar Republic, give way to new extremisms, extreme actions which the policy of the victors in the first war had done so much to arouse? Monnet and Schuman did not hesitate: their offer, explicitly addressed to Germany, was a fundamental act of confidence in the new Germany, through this appeal for the establishment of organic relations so different from all the usual schemes. A turning point in history was achieved.

Peace and democracy, these two, were thus the "good fairies" which presided at the birth of the European Community. I will try to show here how these ultimate aims were maintained during the years which followed - nearly forty years have today gone by - and what has been the contribution of the Community in this field.

Top

It would be too easy to attribute to the Community process the peace which Western Europe has known since the armistice in 1945. Too many other international factors have contributed to this situation, beginning with the existence of a duopoly in world affairs by the United States and the Soviet Union, and with the balance which these two super-powers have maintained between themselves during the development of their military strengths, as in taking the first steps towards disarmament. On the other hand it is justifiable to place to the credit of European integration the quality of present relations between Germany and the other European nations which she had confronted during the two bloody and merciless wars. Not only is there no risk of war, but the prospect of a war or even of a climate of hostilities, of serious tensions is totally out of the question. Centuries of European civil war seem to have been blotted out. And this is particularly noticeable in the new generation.

How could a development at the same time so favourable and so extraordinary be produced? Let us return once again to 1950. East-West tension was acute. The blockade of Berlin was a spectacular illustration of this and it had happened only the previous year. In the tripartite meetings on the future of Germany the United States and Great Britain persuaded France to accept the removal of controls and the complete reintegration of Germany into the Western economy. Later they would request the integration of Germany into the Western Defence system. For five years France maintained her refusal, but no one could imagine that she could finally obstruct the implementation of the policy adopted by her two great allies.

What would have been the outcome, following the usual customs of international diplomacy? France would have had to yield in return for concessions from her partners which would have been more a matter of form than of content, but which would have been perceived in Germany as so many gestures of mistrust, as a refusal to give them equal rights, as the continuation of traditional enmity. Franco-German relations would have remained poisoned for many years and as a result the whole reconciliation of Western Europe would have been retarded or even paralysed.

The creative act of Jean Monnet, shared by Robert Schuman, meant an escape from the deadlock in which traditional negotiations enclosed them, opening without any limitation, any after-thought, a different way. It offered reconciliation and interdependence, it offered at the same time a vast prospect for the future, that of a "wider and deeper community", that of a "European federation indispensable to the preservation of peace". The political character of this offer transcended the economic aspects (one could argue about the technical advisability of separate management for two economic sectors of major importance) and it is well that Chancellor Adenauer, whose rapid and total adherence would be the other decisive factor, understood this.

Top

The economic and political reintegration of Germany into Europe was inescapable Five years after the end of a pitiless war, the transformation of political and psychological relations between the peoples of Western Europe through the European Community project was one of the exceptional contributions which only great statesmen can provide The leaders of France and Germany called upon their two peoples to put an end to a century and a half of war and hatred and to commit themselves to the path of friendship, d process which General de Gaulle would continue. The widespread support which this initiative received confirmed the value of this policy and allowed the Franco-German understanding, soon incorporated into a wider understanding between the peoples of the Community, to be maintained and deepened during the half-century since then in spite of the incidents and the quarrels which life in the Community entails.

Peace in Europe, but what contribution has the European Community made to world peace beyond the indirect support represented by the existence of a zone of friendship in Western Europe? The answer has been for a long time confused. The failure of the European Defence Community, in 1954, after long and difficult negotiations, had in fact broken the momentum of the initial enterprise towards a political Community. The process towards establishing a European Community, when it was revived by the Treaty of Rome, was confined to the economic sector alone.

The setting up, in 1970, of the arrangements for political co-operation, that is to say the policy of co-operation in matters of foreign policy, allowed the original plan of the "founding fathers" to be taken up again. The participation of Great Britain from 1973 and the impetus which your country has given to the work of political co-operation has been a determining factor. During the last fifteen years, thanks to this political co-operation, the "Nine" then the "Ten" and today the "Twelve", have been enabled to play a growing role on the world scene, and their actions have always been oriented towards the search for peace and the strengthening of international cohesion.

Top

Certainly the action taken by the Twelve has its limits. The stand on principle taken by certain of them (like the military non-commitrnent of Ireland) means, for example, that they are absent from discussions on disarmament and security and are not able to intervene as a group of Twelve in the present dialogue of the two super-powers. This serious limitation carries with it an element of compensation. The fact that military questions are totally excluded from political co-operation means that the peaceful character of the actions of the Twelve are the more easily recognised by the international community. For the countries of the Third World, in particular, the Twelve are a more open negotiator and are more acceptable than the super-powers, and sometimes even certain members of the Twelve taken in isolation. Beyond the differences in legal status, the European Community and political co-operation are seen from the outside as a unique reality, a Europe with a rationale of its own.

This Europe has played a positive role since the beginning of the economic difficulties of the 1980s by maintaining a dialogue between the countries of the Third World and the industrialised countries. and by strengthening the support of the latter for the most deprived among them. Whether one refers to their early attempts to create a "new world economic order" or the present search for solutions to the indebtedness of the Third World, Europe, in this domain, has risen above mere declarations. Her co-operation with nearly seventy countries of Mrica, the Caribbean and the Pacific, among them many of the least developed countries of the world, has been little short of exemplary in character. Furthermore one must not underestimate the contribution of Europe to the developing East-West dialogue through (he Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe. Political co-operation has assured the cohesion of the European countries. This has made possible successive agreements. Finally the important resolution of Venice on the Near East adopted in 1980 by the nine heads of government in the European Council has become one of the reference texts and remains without doubt, still today, the best outline of a basis for a settlement of the conflict.

Top

I should like now in the second part of this lecture, to present the contribution which Europe was able to bring to the maintenance of democracy and the respect of human rights. At the beginning of this lecture I recalled the indirect contribution which a new type of relationship between European countries, and particularly between Germany and her neighbours, had provided for the consolidation of German democracy. From the days after the war (not to go hack too far in history), the promoters of European unity have closely linked the concept of Europe with those of democracy and the defence of human rights. One of the major proposals of the Congress of Europe at the Hague forty years ago was to negotiate a convention instituting independent authorities, notably a European Court, to watch over the respect for human rights which the Convention would guarantee. Adopted within the framework of the Council of Europe, the European Convention of Human Rights remains the touchstone for judging the democratic character of a European country. Adherence to the Convention has marked the return of Spain and Portugal to democracy, while the Greek colonels withdrew from the Convention of their own accord so as to avoid Greece’s exclusion from it.

The European Communities did not have a specific mandate in these fields, and their deliberately economic character during the 60s and 70s could have held them back from efforts to re-establish democracy in the whole of Western Europe. That would have been to forget the fundamentally political character of their institutions, particularly of the European Parliament and also of the European Commission.

What was done in the case of Greece during the regime of the colonels is significant and exemplary. Greece was associated with the Community with the desire to join. Breaking this treaty of association would have been a mistake. It would have amounted to penalising indefinitely the Greek people, the first victims of the dictatorship. Instead of this, at the invitation of the Commission supported by the European Parliament, all three Institutions of the Communities decided to freeze the Association Agreement for the duration of the dictatorship. They put a freeze on meetings and gatherings of a political nature, a freeze on the common Institutions, a freeze on economic intervention. The existence of the Association and its freeze at the same time were a constant reminder of the ostracism to which the regime was subjected. They provided continuous encouragement to the Greek democrats in their fight against the regime. Brussels became one of the centres of resistance to the colonels where exiled democrats and emissaries of the resistance within Greece itself could meet. The Information Office of the European Community in Athens, which the military regime had not dared to touch, was a liaison and information centre for resistance workers and Greek democrats. I am happy to be able to recall this here, since Catherine Doukas, who was the driving force, was taken from us a few weeks ago.

Top

When the colonels had to give way, the first international step of the new democratic government, the government of President Caramanlis, was to send a ministerial mission to Brussels to revive the Association and then to request membership of the Community for Greece. This became effective from the beginning of 198 1.

Turning to Spain, I recall also that, since the Hague Congress, where that eminent Spaniard Salvador de Madariaga had played a major role, Europe had been one of the points of agreement and common ground between the Spanish exiles and the opposition within Spain. With the passing of the years, evoking the prospect of membership of the Communities had in Spain become synonymous with calls for a return to democracy, whether in courageous articles in some of the newspapers, in seminars or in increasingly frank discussions. The applications for membership of the European Communities by Portugal and Spain were, as in the case of Greece, accompanied by a return to democratic regimes. Effective from 1985 their membership has caused a remarkable economic revival of these countries, which will in turn be another factor in the strengthening of democracy there.

Thus the contribution of the Communities to democracy in Europe is not negligible. Should we not go further? Should the Communities not also ensure that human rights are maintained in their member states, and be able to intervene if there were a crisis in one of their members and if democracy were rejected?

The present organisation, concentrating on the economy, does not allow us to give a clear answer. In the course of the negotiations for Greek membership the Council of Ministers rejected a proposal of the European Commission to make explicit reference to democratic values and respect for human rights in the preamble of the treaty of Accession. On the other hand they supported a joint declaration of the three Institutions, Parliament, Council and Commission, requesting the Court of Justice in Luxembourg to watch over respect of fundamental rights of the citizen in the implementation of Community regulations. This request is, incidentally, in accordance with the case-law of the Court.

Top

A consideration of the possibility of a fuller guarantee for human rights within the Community - as, indeed, for a fuller engagement of the Community, on a world scale, towards peace and development - turns our attention once again to the plans for a political community or a European Union, to use the vocabulary of today. These were turned down in 1954 at the same time as the European Defence Community Treaty, but are still existing. The European Parliament spectacularly revived them in 1984, on the initiative of Altero Spinelli, adopting his draft treaty on European Union. The draft treaty refers to the common treasure made up of the rights guaranteed in the constitutions of the Member States and those guaranteed under the European Convention of Human Rights without excluding the elaboration and adaptation of a European declaration which would include a more complete list of fundamental rights and economic and social rights which the Institutions of the Union would have a duty to guarantee. However this hypothesis of an European Declaration of Human Rights is still fairly controversial as the present discussions of the Institutional Committee of the European Parliament demonstrate.

Reference to our shared experience, indeed our extensive shared experience, is today probably the best basis on which to claim an active role for the Community in Matters of Human Rights. This would include the possibility for it to suspend one of its members if it were to move away from democracy.

The draft Treaty of European Union also envisages the possibility for powers in the field of foreign policy to be progressively transferred to the Community. Thus it would satisfy the old aspiration for Europe to speak with a single voice and put all its weight, both economic and political, towards efforts for peace and international agreement. Furthermore let us not forget what influence a politically and economically united Europe would have on our brother nations in Eastern Europe who are tragically cut off from European democracy. This would he for them an example for them and a hope, the prospect of a peaceful evolution towards freedom.

Top

Thus peace and democracy have been linked to the creation and development of the European Community from its origins and in the finest moments of its history. The search for Peace and democracy has also played a part in the most daring initiatives for the transformation and deepening of the Community. That alone would justify the undertaking of this transformation. But don’t let us become complacent. Democracy and the respect for human rights are not, even in our own countries, abstract principles which it is sufficient to proclaim. They demand daily vigilance, a daily struggle, a daily affirmation in order not to give in to the temptation to yield to the deviations preached by some demagogue or other. We know about these difficulties, these tiresome realities; we suffer from them in my country, in the other countries of Europe, and perhaps in yours as well. Let us he thankful that the European Community acts as a reinforcement in this continuing battle against the perversion of our shared values, and encourages us to be even more demanding in their affirmation and in their implementation. June 1988.

Top