' 19701973: Negotiations and accession, Denmark in the EEC

1
. 1970-1973 Negotiations and accession, Denmark
in the EEC
Niels Winkel Prime Minister Jens Otto Krag took
Denmark into the EC in 1973. Painted 1983.
Frederiksborg Museum.
2
Context...

• Spring 1969 Charles de Gaulle resigns
• Georges Pompidou accepts to re-open negotiations
  with Britain on EEC accession
• Balance German power, bargain for deepening of
  CAP
• Britain turns to the EEC
• Avoid political isolation
• Turn to Britain's main markets
• Negotiations from 1970 to 1972
• January 1973 England becomes a member-state of
  the Communities
• EFTA loses even more of its significance

BEHRENDT, Fritz, Het Parool. 12.06.1969
3
Nordic suitors

• Denmark and Norway apply
• 1962, 1967 the same pace than Britains
  application
• Necessity to keep contacts with British market
• Norway and dependency, but the problem of the CAP
  Denmark and the CAP
• Applications rejected with the British
  application by de Gaulle 1963, 1968
• NORDEK had been conceived in this frame, as a
  Nordic co-operation to prepare a common position
  in the EEC
• It would be a mistake to consider NORDEK and EEC
  as mutually exclusive for Denmark and Norway
• Denmark would have continued SKANDEK in 1970, but
  Sweden and Norway refuse it
• When NORDEK and SKANDEK fail, Denmark and Norway
  have already crossed the Rubicon towards the EEC

4
A number of difficult questions

• Denmark
• A high-level agriculture, that would be in
  competition with others (France) in the CAP
• For Norway, the texts of the 1960s applications
  spell out the problems
• Norway's application for membership to the EEC,
  April 30th 1962?
• On behalf of the Norwegian GovernmentI have the
  honor to requestthat negotiations be opened with
  a view to Norways accession to (the treaty of
  Rome)Norways accession to the EEC will raise
  special problems owing to its geographical
  situation and economic structure. (PM Halvard
  Lange).
• Fishing, industrial development, agricultural
  national subsidies, national support to
  non-competitive zones
• For both NATO membership can be a problem
• For both the emphasis on intergovernmental
  policy-making and not on supranationality
• In the EEC, France cold, West-Germany (Willy
  Brandt) supportive

5
Divisions

• Internal divisions in societies
• Ireland, that applies at the same time, sees a
  consensus between government and population on
  the benefits of EEC accession
• Denmark and Norway, on the other hand, have
  difficulties selling the EEC to their population
• Abandonment of sovereignty, economic and social
  problems, fear of Communities dirigism and
  bureaucracy, supranationality, attack on
  democracy, etc
• Town vs country export vs domestic market etc
• Problems with Nordic partners
• Sweden is associated to the talks in 1970, but
  withdraws in 1971
• Neutrality, mostly, fear of the Community system
• Finland cannot be associated with the talks
• Iceland prefers to stay outside

6
Negotiating common features

• Negotiations start on July 21st 1970 with
  England, Ireland, Denmark and Norway
• Negotiations in the shadow of EEC-Britain
  negotiations
• A reputation of pragmatists, not caring for the
  political aspect
• The role of Willy Brandt, West-German chancellor
• A change from Konrad Adenauer Adenauer was
  defiant of the Scandinavians solely economic
  vision of European integration
• Brandts personal implication Swedish and
  Norwegian exile in the 1930s-1940s (born Herbert
  Ernst Karl Frahm, then Gunnar Gaasland, Willy
  Brandt)?
• West-Germany and natural partners
• Advocating against a more cautious France
• The problem of agriculture, NATO, etc
• 2 different negotiating strategies Denmark
  flexible, Norway stiff due to domestic divisions

7
Negotiating accession Denmark

• Butter and beacon the problem of Danish
  agriculture
• A competitive, export-based agriculture
• Two main markets Britain and West-Germany
• Goals markets, the CAP
• Opponents France, the Netherlands
• A sound negotiation strategy brings results for
  Denmark
• A transition period limits the entry of Danish
  products on the EEC market
• Denmark gets opt-outs on several areas
• January 22 1972 treaty with the EEC
• Selling the deal the Danish referendum
• October 2nd 1972 89,5 participation, 62 yes.
• Obvious economic advantages contribute to this
  result, whatever the political reservations of
  the population

8
Negotiating accession Norway

• Fishing
• 2000 kms of coasts, a developed fleet, an
  export-based activity fear of competition, need
  of markets
• A compromise is found Norway gets a 6 miles
  strip reserved to Norwegian fishermen?
• Agricultural subsidies
• Norwegian government subsidies agriculture in
  non-competitive areas contrary to the principle
  of the CAP -gt what attracts Denmark (the CAP)
  repels Norway
• Prospect of EEC membership rise fear of a rural
  exodus in Norway
• Compromise a long transitory period
• Treaty on January 22 1972
• Referendum
• A difficult, very political campaign, dominated
  by agriculture and national sovereignty Le Monde
  diplomatique, Frank Bjerkholt, September 1970
  The accession project meets considerable
  reservations in Norway
• September 25th 1972 77,7 participation 53,5
  for the No
• Prime Minister Trygve Bratteli resign, and the
  pro-EEC left is dealt a blow
• The fear of peripheral, isolated zones fear of
  dirigisme, isolation, foreign influence, rural
  exodus North vs South

9
1973 Denmark enters

• Denmarks accession to the Europe Communities
• The new Communities meet in Paris on October
  19th-21st 1972
• A treaty is signed in 1972 with the non-member
  Nordic states
• in January 1973, the EFTA countries (Sweden,
  Austria, Portugal, Finland, and Iceland) would
  have a free-trade association with the countries
  of the EEC
• Divisions in Finland
• A society divided over the USSR
• YYA kyllä, EEC ei
• Kekkonen, the Left, personalities

A Finnish Left divided on EEC matters A
demonstration against the free-trade agreement
with the EEC and supportive of the 1948 treaty
with the USSR, 1973
10
Denmark in the EEC

• Defiance regarding supranationality
• Yet it is accepted as a rule of the game, in
  order to obtain other positive things
• Concentration on specific national issues CAP,
  Nordic affairs, environment, etc
• A new EEC with Britain and Denmark changes
  already done
• Co-operation à la carte between the EEC, Nordic
  contacts, NATO, etc