The European Union & the United Kingdom: A Troubled Relationship | EU History Explained Episode 4
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ม.ค. 2022
- In this new episode of #EUHistoryExplained, Giulia Bonacquisti, Project Manager at the Trans European Policy Studies Association (TEPSA), takes a look at the troubled history of the UK's relations with Europe.
It is two years since the United Kingdom formally left the European Union, and over one year since the end of the #Brexit transition period. But the difficult relations between the UK and the EU didn't start in 2016. From a stop-start accession process filled with hurdles and challenges, through a series of opt-outs from EU policies, and culminating in a tense series of Brexit negotiations, the UK's involvement in the European project has been troubled since the start.
In this video, we take a look back over the last 90 years of European integration, from the British perspective. Beginning with Churchill's championing of a European project without British involvement in the 1930s, and moving through successive British governments' attempts to balance their interests between the Commonwealth & USA and the emerging Common Market in Europe, the path to British accession to the EEC in 1973 was a difficult one. But the trouble didn't end there, and we also explore the decades of British membership, moving through Thatcher's critiques of the Community and tense debate over the British contribution to the European budget, and a series of British opt-outs from major EU policies such as Schengen and the Europe. Finally, we explore the impact of all this history on the current state of relations. After Brexit, the UK has gone from a member with many opt-outs to an outside seeking opt-ins. What can the history of UK-EU relations teach us about their future?
EU History Explained is TEPSA's video series exploring the origins of the modern EU. If you have ever wondered how the European Union of today came to be, or what lies behind the talk of politics being shaped in 'Brussels', then this is the series for you!
Subtitles available in: English, French, German, Italian, Spanish + more coming soon!
We would like to thank the Historical Archives of the European Union at the European University Institute and Roland Parr for their contribution.
TEPSA Website: www.tepsa.eu/
TEPSA Twitter: / tepsaeu
TEPSA Facebook: / tepsa.eu
TEPSA LinkedIn: / tepsabrussels
TEPSA Instagram: / tepsaeu
Script: Giulia Bonacquisti
Filming & Editing: Tanguy Babled & Hugh Evans
Music: Garrett Bevins - Infinite - Infinite (Wondershare Filmora X)
Co-funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA). Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. - บันเทิง
good explanation
Good Explain
Richard I think that the real lesson is that quitting is possible and without a war. On the rest in 10' you can't put such a long difficult relationship. The reading depends also on the border side you are seeing the story.
Quite a good summary but exaggerates some of the negatives (e.g. doesn't mention that Churchill changed his mind on UK participation , the opt-out of the social chapter was short lived (reversed by the Blair government), it didn't actually opt-out of the Charter of Rights, the non participation in Schengen was (like Ireland's) for objective practical problems, the budget rebate was objectively justified) and it doesn't mention the positives (e.g. the UK was a major supporter of deepening the single market, of developing the research programmes, of enlargement and of the CFSP. It was also one of the main net contributors to the budget).
Nor does it show that there were real battles WITHIN Britain between EU supporters and eurosceptics (just as there are in other member states, so far fortunately without the (narrow) victory that the eurosceptics had in the UK, but nonetheless often creating problems).
The real lesson is not so much that the UK was a special case, but more that the internal battle within Britain was lost.
Well done Giulia. A very good summary of a fraught relationship, but one that with more political courage on the part of the successive UK governments could have worked out in the end. One thought I have watching this: maybe we should not have been so forthcoming with opt outs… which only invited the British to ask for more and achieve a status is someone only half in. The 2016 deal to help Cameron win the referendum he had foolishly called was a heroic effort on the part of the EU to be conciliatory.
It's not difficult to understand, it's where cultures collide in the English Channel and the North sea.
My sympathies are completely with the EU than England Tantrums to join, tantrums as a member, tantrums to leave. Vive DeGaulle!
Wasn't he the bloke who had bastard kids and the French weren't allowed to know but, the rest of the world did know?
Btw, it was the United Kingdom and not England who voted to leave.
De Gaulle was right
De Gaulle was right'...What, to hide the fact that he had bastard kids and he didn't think the French weren't allowed to know?
Immediately the Common Market/EEC and the EU differences should be addressed. Most UK people have some minor issues with the former but it was the formation of the EU that was the deal breaker for most citizens.
Oh, come on!! The UK was always the uncomfortable uncle with racist jokes!!
Thank you for leaving and not making us Kick you out once and for all!!
KEEP OUT.
If the utterly useless John Major or dodgy Tony Blair gave the UK electorate a vote on the future relationship with the EU, things might have been different.
It's vital that the real reason why the UK held a referendum on EU membership in June 2016 is properly understood and more widely disseminated.
For those who believe the Brexit plebiscite was some kind of democratic event, ie. giving the British people a say in this vital matter, I can only say; "dream on" - you couldn't be further from the truth - the REAL reason was naked electoral calculus!
In 2005 UKIP polled approx. 2 - 3% in National voting intentions - under First Past the Post [FPTP] this relatively small vote share was annoying but completely ignorable - UKIP would effectively win zero seats in a UK General Election with this vote share spread across the UK.
However, over the next ten year period, the UKIP insurgency relentlessly burgeoned to the point where they were registering more like 13 - 14% of National voting intention by 2015. This significantly increased support for UKIP represented an existential threat to Conservative Party electoral prospects - why - because under FPTP this perceived hemorrhaging of core Conservative support meant Labour could win a UK General Election WITHOUT having to increase their National vote share - the split in the Tory voting bloc across a swathe of formerly safe Tory seats would let Labour in via the back door in these local contests!
Conservative Party strategists therefore had to devise an effective counter to this very real electoral threat.
This cold, hard electoral reality explains why David Cameron arrived at his cunning plan to offer perceived defectors from the core Conservative voting bloc a one off chance to realise what potential UKIP supporters most wanted - an opportunity to hold an IN/OUT referendum on EU membership.
Of course, we now know that Cameron's strategy worked - across a significant number of key marginal constituencies where the UKIP threat to incumbent Tory MPs was strong, results in the these local contests demonstrated that enough potential UKIP voters switched their allegiance back to the Conservative candidate during the 2015 General Election, in the process providing Cameron with a very narrow 12 seat House of Commons [HoC] majority - most polls in the run-up period to election day had predicted Labour finishing with the largest number of MPs but short of an overall majority, therefore requiring some form of cooperation with other parties, chief among them the SNP - hence the Conservative election strapline "Coalition of Chaos" used during the campaign period, showing a smiling Alex Salmond with a minature Ed Miliband (Labour leader at the time) in his suit pocket.
Closer analysis of key marginal constituency results reveals just how close run the 2015 General Election was.
Across the seven most keenly contested constituencies where Labour finished runner up but the Conservative candidate became MP, the total winning margin for all seven seats combined was less than two thousand votes - it should be noted that in all of these seven seats the UKIP candidate recorded a relatively strong third place.
It is not unreasonable to infer that just a few thousand citizens in these key marginal constituency contests changed their minds whilst actually in the polling booth on election day; 7th May 2015, switching from UKIP to Conservative because they were convinced that they would have a once in a lifetime opportunity to vote in a referendum on the UK exiting from the EU
With his very narrow (12 seats) HoC majority secured, David Cameron was obliged to make good on his pledge to hold the promised IN/OUT EU referendum, which took place on 23rd June 2016 - the rest of this sad tale, as we know all too well to our cost, is history!
UK should join the NAU (North American Union) when it forms which will be in the near future. Even though they are not apart of our continent, pretty sure we can make an exception due to our shared history.
Ah, another organisation that is supposed to make an exception for the UK.
I supported Brexit,I still do.
The EU and U.K. were never a good match because the British want to be in but they don’t want to abide by the rules.They,right or wrong want the rules to be changed to suit.
Well it doesn’t work like that and this is why it was right we left.
Good riddance!! We should t have let them in in the First place.
Never again.
KEEP OUT!!
Yep, it's a win, win situation for both sides.
As a Brit who voted for Brexit I agree with you 💯 on that.
The UK voters respects democracy, the eu does not.
Does the EU has superiority complex towards UK?
Does the UK have an arrogance complex towards the European Union?
No, the EU is simply superior to the UK. Not very complex at all.
Well, the EU organisation had many opportunities to change their ways, they wouldn't and we all know what happened next.
Brexit happened because UK politicians wouldn't take responsibility for the UK's problems and instead blamed them on the EU. Now everyone can see that the UK's problems are still there, only worse, outside the EU. Leaving the EU makes both the UK and the EU weaker; it was a gift to Putin and a sop to British racists and xenophobes.
It would be a disaster to rejoin the EU, because we would end up like Spain and Grace, bankrupt and bankrupted , and begging for help, at least now we can create something new and something similar to Switzerland if we had the right leader!! The problems now are not only Brexit but Dictatorship like Putin and around the world wars! We are doing not bad compared to many….so we should all stick together and stay with Brexit, and just get on with it, the worst thing is indecision, if we just get on with what we have - we can make it work like Switzerland or Singapore etc whom are not in the EU , we can learn from them instead of being in tunnel vision with indecisions , step down Sunak if you don’t know what you’re doing , give it to David, we have huge amounts of resources and we can build on them…and have the best country ever without joining the EU. We are their friends and they are our friends in the long run, we will be better off being independent and build something extraordinary. Come me on boys and girls, we can do this, we are British, be proud of who we are! 🎉 celebrate! Goodness me!