Effects of the European Economic Communities and the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance on East-West Economic Relations

1978 ◽  
pp. 106-119
Author(s):  
E. S. Kirschen
Keyword(s):  
Economic Assistance ◽  
Mutual Economic ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Mutual Economic Assistance ◽  
East West

Communiqué Creating the Counil of Mutual Economic Assistance, January 25,1949.

1949 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 407-407
Keyword(s):  
Economic Assistance ◽  
Economic Conference ◽  
Mutual Economic ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Mutual Economic Assistance ◽  
Major Increase ◽  
National Economies ◽  
Made In

An economic conference of representatives of Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the USSR and Czechoslovakia was held in Moscow in January.The conference noted the substantial achievements made in developing economic relations among the aforementioned countries, which found expression, first and foremost, in a major increase in trade. The establishment of these economic relations and the implementation of the policy of economic co-operation enabled the countries of people's democracy and the USSR to accelerate recovery and the development of their national economies.

Romania and the Beginning of CMEA Controversies over a Common Trade Policy Towards the EEC, 1969–1972

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-523
Author(s):  
Elena Dragomir
Keyword(s):  
Trade Policy ◽  
European Economic Community ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Economic Assistance ◽  
Economic Community ◽  
Commercial Policy ◽  
Mutual Economic ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Mutual Economic Assistance ◽  
Common Trade

This article examines Romania’s opposition to the attempts of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) in the early 1970s to adopt a common trade policy towards the European Economic Community (EEC). The article covers the period between 1969, when the CMEA embarked on negotiations regarding the deepening of the intra-bloc cooperation and integration, and 1 January 1973, which is the date marking the end of the derogations that the Eastern European states received with regard to the implementation of the EEC’s Common Commercial Policy. The article focuses on Romania’s reasons and tactics of opposition, but it also outlines its views with regard to the EEC, in general, and the CMEA-EEC relations, in particular. Corroborated by findings involving studies in other Eastern European archives, this article will help to create a better understanding of the CMEA debates on integration, on the CMEA-EEC relations, in general, and on Romania’s opposition to the CMEA’s intended common policy towards the EEC, in particular.

Recognition in Return for Détente? Brezhnev, the EEC, and the Moscow Treaty with West Germany, 1970–1973

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 79-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Mueller
Keyword(s):  
European Economic Community ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
West Germany ◽  
Economic Assistance ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
Economic Community ◽  
Mutual Economic ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Mutual Economic Assistance ◽  
Archival Documents

This article draws on Soviet archival documents as well as Western and Russian publications to analyze the background of Leonid Brezhnev's announcements of 1972 regarding the Soviet Union's possible recognition of the European Economic Community (EEC). The analysis takes into account various factors including the integration process, détente, and Soviet relations with West European states. The article shows that Brezhnev's first initiative toward the EEC in March 1972 was designed to facilitate ratification of the Moscow Treaty with West Germany and did not reflect a genuine desire to establish relations with Brussels. The new Soviet approach toward the EEC became manifest only in Brezhnev's second speech on the topic, in December 1972. This strategy, which included mutual recognition and negotiations between the EEC and the Council on Mutual Economic Assistance, was intended to foster détente in Europe and to pave the way toward the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

scholarly journals Establishing and Financing of a Joint Venture

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 787-819
Author(s):  
Norman Scott
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Joint Ventures ◽  
Joint Venture ◽  
Economic Assistance ◽  
United Nations Economic Commission ◽  
Mutual Economic ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Economic Commission ◽  
Mutual Economic Assistance ◽  
East West

This article deals with a Guide prepared by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe concerning east-west joint ventures. The publication focusses on the issues arising in the establishment and operation of east-west joint ventures in those European members countries of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) which now allow this form of industrial co-operation in their respective territories — namely, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania and the Soviet Union. In parallel with that Guide, the author exposes the importance and the contents of the contract itself with its main provisions.

Prospects for integration in the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA)

1976 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 631-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Marer
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Economic Integration ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Economic Assistance ◽  
Mutual Economic ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Trade Blocs ◽  
Mutual Economic Assistance ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
Centripetal Forces

In analyzing the future of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA), it is useful to assess both the centrifugal and centripetal forces affecting regional economic integration. Centrifugal forces include the existing structure of production in Eastern Europe; problems of coordination; and inefficient price systems, among others. Centripetal forces include the worldwide energy crisis; Western inflation and recession; the growing importance of trade blocs; and numerous other factors contributing to the increasing hard-currency indebtedness of the Eastern European countries. Many of these external events have increased the attractiveness for CMEA countries of intrabloc economic relations and provided a momentum for CMEA integration. Analysis of the various forces leads to the conclusion that Soviet economic policy vis-à-vis Eastern Europe will remain crucial in determining the direction and speed of economic integration. Soviet economic involvement with Eastern Europe seems to have been costly for the USSR during the past decade and so it is not obvious that the USSR will attempt to push integration much further than it now stands.

The Formation of the Soviet Bloc's Council for Mutual Economic Assistance: Romania's Involvement

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Dragomir
Keyword(s):  
Division Of Labor ◽  
Soviet Bloc ◽  
Economic Assistance ◽  
Mutual Economic ◽  
Mutual Economic Assistance ◽  
The Creation ◽  
1960S And 1970S ◽  
The 1960S

This article discusses Romania's role in the creation of the Soviet bloc's Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) in January 1949. The article explains why Romanian leaders, with Soviet approval, proposed the creation of the CMEA and why the proposal was adopted. An analysis of Romania's support for the creation of the CMEA sheds interesting light on the stance taken by Romania in the 1960s and 1970s against the Soviet Union's attempts to use the CMEA in forging a supranational division of labor in the Soviet bloc. Romania's opposition was largely in accord with the objectives originally envisaged by Romanian leaders when the CMEA was formed.

Chairman cotton: Socialist Bulgaria’s cotton trade with African countries during the early Cold War (1946–70)

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Jan Zofka
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Economic Assistance ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Mutual Economic ◽  
Mutual Economic Assistance ◽  
Globalization Studies ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Cotton Trade

Abstract This article follows Bulgarian officials engaged in cotton and textile exchange with African states in the early Cold War. These officials founded enterprises for carrying out transactions, collected information on prices at international cotton exchanges and attended meetings of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON) to coordinate trade activities in capitalist markets. Exploring how Bulgarian foreign trade organizations positioned themselves on the scene of international trade, this article argues that cotton traders, instead of upholding the supposed bloc bipolarity of the Cold War, followed the logic of the markets they worked in. A focus on trade infrastructures in particular shows that early Cold War East–South trade was not as strictly bilateral as official agreements and statistics suggest and reveals the systematic embeddedness of the socialist traders’ practices in global capitalist structures. In the field of cotton, the globalizing economy of the early Cold War was not cut in half, as globalization studies have implied.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document