Question 1
The Treaty of Rome established the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1957 (Judt, 2010). The aim of creating the EEC was to form a union of European countries that have shared economic goals. West Germany, Belgium, Italy, Netherlands, Luxembourg, and France are the countries that signed this treaty. This treaty created customs union and a common market for its member states. By signing this treaty, the members sought to achieve three main things: 1) economic expansion, 2) improve the living standards and 3) develop economic activities.
Actually, the common market implied guaranteeing exclusively free movement of goods and services. Free circulation of services, capitals, and persons continued to be the subject to various limitations. It was until in 1987, when the Single European Act was signed, that a boost was provided to promote a genuine unified market (Judt, 2010). This introduced the 1992 European Union Treaty. Another important elements contained in the Treaty of Rome was the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The essence of CAP was to enact a genuinely free market of agricultural produce within the EEC. In addition, it sought to create protectionist policies aimed at guaranteeing adequate profits to European farmers by preventing competition from third-party countries’ products as well as assuring agricultural prices. In 1962, the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) were formed to finance the CAP (Judt, 2010). In recent times, the CAP has continued to absorb most of the community budget and its reforms have been widely used in recent years. In addition, the Treaty of Rome guaranteed prohibition of monopolies and the provision of certain commercial privileges to colonialists of the member states.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Western European states suffered through centuries of bloody conflicts but eventually, they united in the spirit of economic cooperation by signing the Treaty of European Union (Judt, 2010). After the Treaty of Rome, the Treaty of European Union was the next big thing and it was commonly known as the Maastricht Treaty. Signed by European Community Ministers, this treaty called for common security policies, greater economic integration, and collaboration between police and other agencies against immigration, crime, and terrorism issues. In addition, the agreement laid the avenue for the creation of a single European currency called the Euro. As at the time of its implementation in 1993, twelve member states had already ratified the Maastricht Treaty (Judt, 2010). They include Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, the Irish Republic, France, and Britain. Later on, Slovenia, Slovakia, Romania, Poland, Malta, Lithuania, Latvia, Hungary, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Cyprus, Sweden, Finland, Bulgaria, and Austria have joined the Union. In early 2002, the Euro was officially launched into circulation. This Treaty brought about the changeover from the EEC to the European Union.
The Single European Act was the first main revision of the Treaty of Rome (1957). The Act was intended to establish a single market by 1992 and codify European Political Cooperation. It was signed in February 1986 at the Luxembourg and at The Hague in February 1986 (Judt, 2010). It was implemented in 1987. The SEA intended to create a single market by eliminating barriers, improving competitiveness and harmonization within the European Community.
Any European state that meets the EU membership criteria qualifies to join the EU. The membership criteria are what are known as the Copenhagen criteria (Judt, 2010). They include a stable economy, the rule of law, a free market economy, and acceptance of all the EU legislations. A state that desires to join the EU submits a membership application to the EU Commission. The Commission then evaluates whether the applicant meets the Copenhagen criteria. If the state qualifies, then the European Council enters into negotiations with the applicant. These negotiations for membership cannot begin until all the EU governments agree. The negotiations comprise numerous policy areas called chapters that cover current EU legislation (Judt, 2010). The speed of these negotiations is based on how fast the applicant adopts the EU legislation and meets the EU conditions. After completing the negotiations, the applicant state signs an Accession Treaty, which sets out when the country should officially join the EU. All member states governments, the European Parliament and the European Commission must approve this Treaty. In addition, each member state must ratify the treaty.
Question 2
a. Chapter 3 - Employment & Labor Relations.Compare and contrast the Continental and U.S. approach to labor-management relations and training, apprenticeships and layoffs.
Across all the Continental nations, collective bargaining is much higher compared to the US. Though there has been a sharp drop in union density in various countries, collective bargaining has remained relatively stable and high (Hill, 2010). For instance, in Western European countries, union density ranges from below 10% in France to nearly 80% in Sweden. However, collective bargaining is above 80% in all countries apart from Germany, where it is 60% (Hill, 2010). Numerous elements have played a role in the supportive environment for collective bargaining. These are centralized labor market regulation, union-friendly legal systems and union participation in unemployment insurance.
US have a system of majority recognition, which lacks in Continental Europe. In most of the Continental states, there is minimum aggressive opposition to bargaining. Therefore, majority of these countries lack specific legislation that addresses the issue. In some countries, constitutional or statutory provisions on freedom of association are interpreted as containing bargaining rights and in certain countries, national laws contain a legal mandate to bargain. For instance, in Slovenia and Austria, mandatory membership of unions leads to nearly 100% bargaining coverage (Hill, 2010).
Even in nations, which have voluntary multi-employer bargaining, it is still uncommon to find strong government backing for bargaining without statutory support. Holland, Germany and France have mandatory extension laws that have led to high bargaining coverage even with the decline of union density.
Of course, Europe is no paradise for employees. In Europe, employee unions confront the same challenges as their US peers (Hill, 2010). These include hostile national governments, employee relocations to nations with cheaper labor costs, lack of legal protection, increasing employer demand for company-specific flexibility and greater demands for decentralization in bargaining. However, few European companies are campaigning against bargaining coverage and have threatened job losses or employees’ careers through closure or relocation given that employees choose to bargain collectively. Typically, organizing constitutes internal recruitment because a collective agreement has already covered workers. In the US, organizing entails both a union membership campaign and an adversarial campaign for bargaining rights with a specific employer. This explains why Europe has a higher bargaining power and why Mercedes Benz and BMW employees among many others, have bargaining in Germany and not in the US.
Most Continental countries, such as Germany, have an apprenticeship model, which emphasizes on training future workforce. On the other hand, the US depends greatly on informal university partnerships. It is important for companies to invest in employee training, particularly when it is challenging to find the right fit for jobs. Research indicates that in Germany, roughly 60% of the youth worked as apprentices as of 2015, combining both on-the-job training and classroom training (Hill, 2010). This is incomparable to the US, where only 5% of the youth train as apprentices.
b. Chapter 4 - Parental leave, childcare& pre-school education. Compare and contrast the French and U.S. approaches.
Comparing between French and US concerning Parental leave, childcare and pre-school education is relevant. Actually, both countries belong to a group of countries whose family policies and welfare regimes are qualified as conservative corporative or continental. Key characteristics include high spending levels and payroll tax funding with most benefits depending on prior contributions. Concerning the main social insurance programs (disability benefits, healthcare, and pension); both the France and US are consistent with this description (Hill, 2010). In addition, their family policies have a lot in common. Both countries are linked in various ways to labor policies and are explicit and generous in terms of monetary benefits.
The similarities between the two countries end when we look at childcare concept. As of today, the US still adheres to the female-caregiver and male-breadwinner model. On the other hand, France has long outgrown this model and in fact, it is leading the EU in its efforts to offer childcare and related benefits targeted at decreasing costs for families. However, there have been dramatic changes in the US family policies. Actually, US legislators are now placing great distance between themselves and the traditional system via the introduction of a set of new laws in the area of childcare provision and parental leave. For its part, France has constantly been consolidating and enhancing its promotion of policies to guarantee a work-family life balance (Hill, 2010).
c. Chapter 8 – Single-payer (U.K., for instance) and shared-responsibility (France, for instance) health-care systems. How does each work, compare, and contrast each with the U.S. approach.
In the UK’s single-payer system, the government caters for all insured healthcare services. The UK government employs this healthcare system to achieve various goals including reduced economic burden, universal healthcare and better health outcomes for the citizens (Hill, 2010). The UK government not only funds the healthcare and related services but also offers these services via the National Health Service. Most of the healthcare services are free to the population and the coverage provided is broad. This system is funded by taxes. There is a private healthcare system, which operates alongside this public system. However, only 10% of the UK population purchases private coverage.
France has a universal healthcare system, whichis largely funded by the government’s national health insurance. Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) assessed world healthcare models and discovered that France had the best system. This is because, of all the world countries, France offers the close to the best overall healthcare. The main difference between France, the UK, and the US is the fact that in both France and UK, everyone has access to health insurance (Hill, 2010). Every legal citizen on these two countries has the right to access and use healthcare and related services, which are covered by the law of universal coverage. In fact, in France, this law is referred to as la Couverture maladie universelle. On the contrary, in the US, access to healthcare remains a challenging idea. As a matter of fact, statistics from a Consumer Reports study reveals that at least 40% of Americans lack adequate health coverage (Hill, 2010). This is because in the US, as opposed to the UK and France, the federal government has not guaranteed universal healthcare to all its citizens.
Unlike in the UK and France where majority of the population is covered, in the US most of the people remain without cover (Hill, 2010).This forced the US government to implement programs known as Medicaid and Medicare for certain population segments; elderly adults and low-income earners. Today, the US adopted a legal mandate, which demands that all Citizens have an insurance of pay a penalty. Besides these advancements, approximately 30 million Americans continue to live without health care coverage.
Question 3
The basic principles of property rights are much the same in Continental countries and in the US. For instance, England has a system of title registration that governs the transfer of land (Hill, 2010). In the US and Canada, the different deeds are recorded and a title insurance is used in order to protect the buyer. Since 1960s, England has made tremendous developments in terms of law pertaining to restitution (Hill, 2010). This refers to the right to recover any property that was wrongfully transferred to another individual.
Intestate succession is similar throughout Continental states and the US in detail (Hill, 2010). Intestate succession implies that if a person dies without having a will, the state will make one for the individual. The person’s properties will be passed on to his or her heirs according to the state law. For instance, in these countries, the state may decide that the widow gets more than the children do. Generally, all children of both sexes get equal share. Regarding intestate succession, almost all American states safeguard the surviving spouse against disinheritance by securing to her or him a fixed indispensable share of the decedent’s property. In most Continental countries, and especially in England, both the spouse and children and some specific dependents of the decedent are legally allowed to petition the court for discretionary property provision (Hill, 2010). This is often in case the affected individuals feel that the court made an unreasonable decision or provision for them.
The Continental and U.S. share the same approach to the common good. When dealing with issues, the common good approach has always been useful in helping these countries deal with issues, especially those pertaining to the overall picture or the environment (Hill, 2010). The common good approach has also allowed these countries to regard their citizens as part of the larger society. Therefore, Continental countries and U.S. share common institutions and conditions upon which their welfare depends. These societies have thrived courtesy of the efforts to sustain their communities for the good of all, including the weakest and most vulnerable community members. Some of the things, which have nurtured healthy and functioning communities in both Continental and U.S., include affordable healthcare, good schools, stable family life, effective public safety, well managed ecosystem, properly maintained infrastructure, a peaceful society and good public safety.
The main similarity is that Continental countries and the US have introduced a system of compulsory registration (Hill, 2010). In France, for example, the introduction of this system was previously hindered by the high costs that are involved in complete remaking of the topographical land surveys. On the other hand, the main barrier to compulsory land registration in England was the conveyancing branch of the legal profession (Hill, 2010). A powerful government, like that which was in Germany, is crucial to overcome these barriers. It might be perceived as a mere accident that the radical reforms of property law in England were attained during the post-war era when bureaucracy was still strong in England.
The Continental region and the US share some common elements pertaining to property rights and the common good. In fact, the US shares much more specific similarities to the law in other Continental countries than it would have been imagined.
Question 4
The collapse of fascism in Portugal was paradoxical and sudden. After numerous years of aborted coups, authoritarian rule and quixotic gestures of opposition, junior officers meticulously planned and changed the old regime in less than twelve hours (Eichengreen, 2008).Though this move was sudden, it saw hundreds of thousands of people pour into the streets of Portugal, welcoming the army as liberators. There was a national salvation as the captains publicly invited impeccable fascist credentials who had crossed over to liberalism side.
In Spain, the collapse of fascism was quite silent as it occurred on very favorable terms, which led the country to transition to a democracy state (Eichengreen, 2008). This transition was conducted based on terms, which were greatly favorable to the forces that controlled the Spanish state, led by the King himself, who saw Franco as the greatest patriot in Spain’s history. The core facet of this transition was the Amnesty Law that called for immunity for all people who had perpetrated political crimes during the fascism regime (Eichengreen, 2008). Accompanying this law was a Silence Pact among the leaders of all political parties, among them the left-wing parties. The left wing comprised of the communist and the socialist parties. Consequently, fascism disappeared completely.
As of the 20 th century, both Portugal and Spain were some of the two countries in the developed world, which were unable to grow (Eichengreen, 2008). By the end of the fascism era in these countries, the rightist economy professor Antonio de Oliveira Salazar, had taken over Portugal while Spain had collapsed under the dictatorship of fascist Francisco Franco. These countries only got a chance to adopt parliamentary democracy in the mid-70s. This motivated the European Community to duly accept Portugal and Spain with the goal of expanding the market.
Question 5
In Poland, the collapse of communism was a long time predictable. Years of political corruption, managerial inefficiency and divisiveness had weakened their control. As of 1970s, the communists had already experienced two severe political setbacks (Eichengreen, 2008). In 1970 and next 1976 which forced them to change policies due to workers’ protests. Further, the election of former Cracow cardinal Karol Wojtyla as Pope in 1978 undermined their authority (Eichengreen, 2008). The newly elected pope gave his native country a triumphant visit that sparked massive outburst of national pride. According to the Poles, it was solely the responsibility of the Pope, and not any other leader, to guide the country. Sadly, communism in Poland collapsed because the leaders did not secure proper support from the Soviet Union. Moscow did not intervene to undermine solidarity; rather, he pushed the Polish allies to do it for themselves. In early 1989, the Soviet Union only watched as the Polish communists negotiated away their political control (Eichengreen, 2008). On the other hand, the Soviet Union leaders initiated a dialogue with the very first democratic, non-communist government of Poland.
Various factors led to the end of communist in the Soviet Union. To begin with, Mikhail Gorbachev introduced various reforms that triggered opposition movements to the Communist governments in countries of the Soviet bloc (Eichengreen, 2008). Demonstrations became a common phenomenon. Gorbachev further forced governments to accept measures towards liberalization. However, it is argued that these measures were insufficient.
In 1987, Gorbachev reduced censorship and instead introduced a policy reform known as glasnost or openness (Eichengreen, 2008). In addition, he introduced a policy known as perestroika or reconstruction. Nevertheless, he did not change the inefficient and wasteful communist economic model. In 1989, events started moving at a fast pace. First, the Russian government withdrew its troops from Afghanistan. Next, in Eastern Europe, communist collapsed. Moreover, there was growth of nationalism, particularly, in the Baltic region. Lastly, in 1990, Lithuania announced its independence (Eichengreen, 2008). Though Gorbachev could not accept this reality, he failed to bring the Lithuanians back under his rule. In the meantime, demonstrations erupted in the other Soviet Republics. In 1991, there was an attempted coup by a group of conservatives. This led to detention of Gorbachev in Crimea. However, led by Boris Yeltsin, the Russians protested and soon the coup ended and they released Gorbachev. However, the attempted coup sparked the breakup of the Soviet Bloc and the fall of communism.
Years of suppression by the Communist regimes and hopes of freedom in Soviet countries were further fueled by Gorbachev’s conciliatory policy towards the Western nations (Eichengreen, 2008). Maintaining reformed Communist regimes proved to be impossible. Their desire for economic liberty and political democracy swept them away. Within three years, Communism collapsed and individual countries obtained freedom, starting with Russia’s satellite nations and then later within the Soviet Union itself. The dissolution of Comecon and the Warsaw Pact led to the disintegration of the Eastern Bloc structures. Then, the Soviet Union broke down into individual, independent republic states. By December of 1991, communism had stopped to exist and Russia had become an independent nation (Eichengreen, 2008). In the same month, Gorbachev resigned
The fall of communism in the Soviet Union Bloc resulted in dislocation of the Bloc, slapped by an economic, political, and ideological crisis (Eichengreen, 2008). In turn, this was a recipe for the collapse of the entire empire, serving as both the cause and effect of the death of Communism. The organizations, which were particular to Federalism in the Soviet, precipitated the implosion of the Bloc regardless of the fact that they were primarily meant to consolidate it. Each at a time, the Soviet Socialist Republics declared their independence in 1991 summer. In the same year, most of these republics that had become sovereign, redefined their respective relationships by establishing the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
Question 6
A sense of collective memory and history played an important role in the unification of the formerly communist nations of Eastern Europe and Europe (Judt, 2010). The two were largely inspired by political mobilization in the cause of formation of modern collective identity and state building. This is considering the fact that both lacked a national identity before. In addition, the titular ethnic conflicts played a key role in shaping bringing the two around an ethno-national narrative. This ascertained the uniqueness of both the formerly communist nations of Eastern Europe and Europe. Central to this unification was the shared commemoration of the Holocaust. Europe and Eastern Europe shared reflections and memories of this tragedy, which sent a message of “Never Again.” They agreed to protect each other against the kind of intolerance, racism, dangerous nationalism, and xenophobia, which had plunged them into war.
By sharing a pan-European history, the former communist countries acquired an unofficial pass into the EU. To be specific, Poland experienced one of the darkest moments on the eve of EU accession. The then President, Aleksander Kwaśniewski gave an apology which sparked a national debate regarding the dark episode (Judt, 2010). This debate made the Jewish Poles to reevaluate the self-image of their actions during the war. By agreeing to the pan-European narrative, the Eastern and Central European countries had to welcome each other.
The European Free Trade Association (EFTA) refers to a free trade area and a regional trade organization (Judt, 2010). This organization runs parallel with the EU and the member countries are part of the European Single Market. The accession of Denmark, the UK, and Ireland to the EEC in 1973 marked the beginning of the collapse of EEC. In 1995, Portugal, Finland, Sweden, and Austria followed. They all left and joined the EU. Only four member states remained Switzerland, Norway, Liechtenstein, and Iceland.
References
Eichengreen, B. J. (2008). The European Economy since 1945: Coordinated Capitalism and Beyond . New York, NY: Penguin Press.http://sbiproxy.uqac.ca/login?url=http://international.scholarvox.com/book/88807827.
Hill, S. (2010). Europe's promise: Why the European way is the best hope in an insecure age . Berkeley: University of California Press.
https://www.overdrive.com/search?q=6C28D606-BC4A-4341-85CE-E037A64152DE.
Judt, T. (2010). Postwar: a history of Europe since 1945. London: Vintage.
