Kommentar

In this passage, Guillaume de Bertier describes the long path to unity traversed by the Western European states since the Marshall Plan (1948). Concerned about their “autonomy” and “freedom” (p. 46) in the face of the double threat of Soviet occupation and the American “protectorate”, the “free nations of the old continent” had had no choice but to combine their forces through “a series of supranational institutions” including the EEC (p. 51). Through the Marshall Plan for “Europe” (p. 47) – understood as an “autonomous unity” (p. 45) – the “European nations” had developed a sense of their shared problems, interests and interrelationships following two World Wars and in the middle of the Cold War. These nations were united by material and political concerns rather than cultural factors, writes de Bertier. The Europe of the Common Market is consequently portrayed in this textbook as a concrete, pragmatic Europe, a Europe of necessity, which emerged under specific circumstances and at a time when the fate of the old continent influenced the course of global history. Adopting a quasi-teleological approach, the author states that these “aspirations for unity” were a logical continuation of the history of Western civilisation. However, he makes no reference to any specific, albeit often idealistic, early notions of unity in the European continent.

While the historian Fernand Braudel took pains to avoid any excessive confidence of victory in his 1963 textbook (published by Belin), de Bertier made no bones about his enthusiasm for the young EEC. In florid tones and peppered with superlatives, he emphasises the extraordinary character of the successes – in particular material and economic successes – of the Common Market. The “progress of the Common Market” is described as being so “rapid and phenomenal” (p. 51) that even proud England had been forced to abandon its aversion to a single European market and apply for membership. Success had also been achieved in political terms, the author avers, because the general “harmonisation” was well underway (p. 50). Despite its strict rule of unanimity, the EEC knew how to “effectively tackle the most difficult problems” (p. 50). Rather than stigmatising the difficulties encountered by the Six in their meetings and bringing up their differences and disputes, particularly in agriculture, de Bertier clearly prefers to emphasise the challenges met and mastered and successful manoeuvres undertaken in the diplomatic arena. He looks to the future with optimism. The spectacular successes chalked up thus far benefit both the old continent, which undergoes a real “rebirth” at international level – by the end of 1965 its “currency reserves [exceed] those of the USA” – as well as the six signatory states, which make visible progress at national level. From the author’s point of view, far from hampering national ambitions, the new, unified Europe had the ability to effortlessly link the common project with national interests and thus guarantee the “autonomy” of the states and the continent.

The interest and confidence that the Catholic historian shows for this embryonic Europe can be seen clearly in the considerable number of historical pictures included in the textbook to illustrate this “unification process”: the signing of the “Treaty establishing the EEC” (p. 49), the NATO headquarters at Fontainebleau before transferral to Brussels (p. 50), pictures of the key players in European unification. The “Europe in pictures” emerging from the rest of the illustrations throughout the third chapter, is implicitly a French Europe. The “trailblazers of European unification” are spearheaded by the highly symbolic figure of Jean Monnet, who appears in both photos featured on the relevant double page (pp. 48-49). He is depicted as a brilliant advisor to the “French Minister Robert Schuman” (p. 48) and even as a visionary (p. 49). Robert Schuman, Paul-Henri Spaak, and even Charles de Gaulle are only mentioned briefly or at most shown in a single photo (p. 51).

In these pages, de Bertier proves to be not only a believer in Europe but also, and equally, a nationalist. If he is to be believed, the successes of the young EEC are chiefly French successes, as we can see from his proud declarations in his assessment of the EEC thus far. He may not use the designation “founding father of Europe” for Jean Monnet in his textbook, and his Europe is not resplendent with colour like the textbooks published in 2008. But his statements, in the middle of the Cold War, speak of the early development of a European vision for the future conveyed through school textbooks, rich in positive representations of the unified Europe and a pantheon of “heroes” of European unification dominated by French diplomacy.

Maguelone Nouvel-Kirschleger
Translation : Isabelle Quillévéré


Bibliography:

Bossuat, Gérard, Faire l’Europe sans défaire la France, soixante ans de politique d’unité européenne des gouvernements et des présidents de la République française, Bruxelles, Peter Lang, 2006.

Id., Les fondateurs de l’Europe unie, Paris, Belin, 2001.

Gerbet, Pierre, La naissance du Marché Commun : 1957, Bruxelles, Éd. Complexe, 1987.

Warlouzet, Laurent, Quelle Europe économique pour la France? : La France et le Marché commun industriel, 1956-1969, Lille, Service de reproduction des thèses, 2007.