Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:19:11.183Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economic Integration versus National Sovereignty: Differences between Eastern and Western Europe*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

John Pinder
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, NEW TECHNOLOGIES ARE bringing greater specialization and scale of production, and hence more need for interdependence among the economies of nation states. Nowhere is this need more keenly felt than in Europe, both East and West.

Type
Article
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , 01 July 1989 , pp. 309 - 326
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Paolo, Cecchini, with Michel, Catinat and Alexis, Jacquemin, The European Challenge 1992: The Benefits of a Single Market, Aldershot Wildwood House, 1988, p. 84.Google Scholar

2 See Pinder, John, ‘Positive Integration and Negative Integration: Some Problems of Economic Union in the EEC’, The World Today, 03 1968.Google Scholar

3 Robbins, Lionel, Economic Planning and International Order, London, Macmillan, 1937.Google Scholar

4 Haas, Ernst B., The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social and Economical Forces 1950–1957, London, Stevens, 1958.Google Scholar

5 Comprehensive Programme for the Further Extension and Improvement of Cooperation and the Development of Socialist Economic Integration by the CMEA Member‐Countries, Moscow, CMEA Secretariat, 1971, Section 4; and Bogomolov, Oleg T., ‘Integration by Market Forces and through Planning’, in Machlup, Fritz (ed.), Economic Integration: Worldwide, Regional, Sectoral, London, Macmillan, 1976, p. 308.Google Scholar

6 See Kaser, Michael, Comecon: Integration Problems of the Planned Economies, London, Oxford University Press, second edition 1967, pp. 106 Google Scholar ff; and Pinder, John, ‘Comecon, an East European Common Market?’, in Lukaszewski, Jerzy (ed.), The People’s Democracies after Prague, Bruges, De Tempel, 1970, pp. 147–8.Google Scholar

7 CMEA Charter, 1960, article 1.2.

8 Comprehensive Programme, op. cit. (n. 5, supra) Section 1.2.

9 See also Pinder, op. cit. (n. 6, supra).

10 Bogomolov, op. cit., pp. 310–2.

11 Two decades ago, for example, in Soldaczuk, J. and Giezgala, J., ‘Economic Integration of Comecon Countries and the Means and Methods of Hastening it’, Gospodarka, Planowa, 11 1968 Google Scholar, cited in Pinder, op. cit. (n. 6, supra).

12 Bogomolov, op. cit., pp. 310–11, 314.

13 Financial Times, 22 April 1988.

14 Czepurko, Aleksander, ‘Comments on New Developments in EEC and CMEA’, in Saunders, Christopher T. (ed.), Regional Integration in East and West, London, Macmillan, 1983, p. 97.Google Scholar

15 Speech on the Seventieth Anniversary of the October Revolution, cited in Van Oudenaren, John, ‘Die Sowjetunion und Osteuropa. Neue Erwartungen und alte Zwänge’, Europa‐Archiv, 10 04 1988 , pp. 171–2.Google Scholar

16 See for example Maximova, M.M., Osnovyen Problemy Imperialisticheskoy Integratsii, Moscow, Mysl, 1971 Google Scholar; and Shishkov, Y.V., Obshchiy Rynok: Nadezhdy i Deistvitelnost, Moscow, Mysl, 1972.Google Scholar

17 Shishkov, Y.V., Kapitalisticheskaya Ekonomika bez Kompasa, Moscow, Politizdat, 1981 Google Scholar, especially chapter 1.1.

18 See for example Haas, op. cit. (n. 4, supra), and Leon. Lindberg, N., The Political Dynamics of European Integration, Stanford, California, Stanford University Press, 1963.Google Scholar

19 See for example Donald Punchala, J., ‘Of Blind Men, Elephants and International Integration’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 03 1972 Google Scholar; and Keohane, R.O. and Nye, J.S., Power and Interdependence. Boston, Little, Brown, 1977.Google Scholar

20 This and other theories are outlined in Carole Webb, ‘Introduction: Variations on a Theoretical Theme’, in Wallace, Helen, Wallace, William, Webb, Carole (eds), Policy‐Making in the European Communities, London, John Wiley & Sons, first edition 1977.Google Scholar

21 See Maximova, op. cit. and Shishkov op. cit. (n. 16, supra).

22 Shishkov used the vivid expression, ‘borrowing from the future’, in describing some of the more collectivist elements in positive integration (ibid., p. 246). Perhaps we could say, however, that the Comecon countries are borrowing from the future when they introduce market mechanisms into their economies.

23 See for example Dekker, Wisse, Europa ‐ 1990, Eindhoven, Philips, 1985.Google Scholar

24 See Spinelli, Altiero, Towards European Union, Sixth Jean Monnet Lecture, Florence-, European University Institute, 1983.Google Scholar

25 Pinder, John, ‘European Community and Nation‐State: A Case for a Neo‐federalism?’, International Affairs, winter 1985/6.Google Scholar

26 See Ellman, Michael, Economic Reform in the Soviet Union, London, Political and Economic Planning, 1969 Google Scholar, and Kaser, Michael and Zielinski, J., Planning in East Europe, London, The Bodley Head, 1970.Google Scholar

27 Shishkov, op. cit. (n. 17, supra), p. 11.

28 Financial Times, 22 April 1988.

29 See Denton, Geoffrey, Planning in the EEC: The Medium‐term Economic Policy Programme of the European Economic Community, London, PEP and Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1967, and Bogomolov, op. cit. (n. 5, supra), p. 306.Google Scholar