Ap European Unification Dbq

DBQ Throughout the years, European history had undergone hurdle after hurdle with the devastating world wars and the advent of the Cold War. From 1946-1989 many different views had begun to emerge and were held over whether or not the European states should be unified. Once again the continent had become divided, with war separating Europe into opposing alliances and turned nations against others. Conflicting arguments soon arose on how to address the state of Europe and whether it should be kept divided or reunified once more. Some believed a unified Europe would bolster its strength, some were more doubtful and undecided, while others declared themselves to be completely opposed to the very notion of unification. To begin with, a unified

To demonstrate, Harold Macmillan, Britain's finance minster held many economic concerns over the possible outcomes of Britain joining the EEC and the possible damage to its Commonwealth. (Doc 7) Macmillan described how the United Kingdom faced a dilemma, it could either stay out of the EEC and lose trade advantages to the European market or join and result in the collapse of its own system of favoring trade within its Commonwealth. Seemingly trapped between, Britain is forced to look one way or another and as a result, those such as Macmillan became extremely doubtful and concerned over the prospect of a united Europe. While the idea was not entirely out of the question, it only served to deter those who pushed for a unification as these issues caused many to remain undecided and unsure of which path to take. Furthermore, France's willingness to stay in the EEC hinged on the very decisions Britain will make as declared by Charles de Gaulle, President of France. (Doc 8) As stated by Macmillan Britain had two paths to take, one that would lead it into the EEC or one that would keep it out. Gaulle however declared that if Britain entered the EEC unhinged with no restrictions, it would push France out of the market for the very reason it joined in the first place. Not only does this mean that the very notion of unification remained extremely uncertain

To illustrate, Duncan Sandys, leader of the British European Movement describes his talk with Gaulle on the Franco-German partnership and how Churchill's speech was badly received in France. (Doc 2) For Gaulle and many French, Germany should not be allowed to reunify under any circumstances and that meant that without a unified German state cooperating with France, that there would be little success in achieving a united continent. Additionally, the sentiments shared by many French was that of a deep hatred against Germany, rooted from the humiliating defeat of France in the Franco-Prussian war. As a result there was little that could be done to reverse this mindset of the French as they wanted no such thing as an enlarged Germany. As Churchill stated however, a reunified Germany was the only way to begin paving the path towards uniting Europe. Through this it became clear that Gaulle and the French were against a unity in Europe. Additionally, Andrei Vyshinsky, the Soviet Foreign Minister, declared that the Marshall Plan was only for the United States to gain more leverage in Europe and that this would only serve to split Europe into two camps. (Doc 3) Instead of a unified Europe, it would only be divided into two sides, the West, largely under the influence of the United States and the East, under the control of the Soviet Union. In addition, Vyshinsky