Western European Union

1958 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-253
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
The State ◽  
European Security ◽  
The Third ◽  
Exchange Of Information ◽  
Draft Recommendation ◽  
Western European

The second part of the third ordinary session of the Assembly of Western European Union (WEU) was opened by its president, Sir James Hutchison (United Kingdom, Conservative) on October 10, 1957, and was closed on October 14. The Assembly first discussed a report introduced by Mr. J. J. Fens (the Netherlands, Popular Catholic) on behalf of the Committee on Defense Questions and Armaments on the state of European security and on October 12, adopted a draft recommendation by 44 votes to 2. The proposal provided that the Assembly recommended to the Council to examine the conclusion to be drawn from Soviet progress in general technology and modern weapons, to consider further steps to achieve the fullest possible exchange of information and cooperation in the production and development of guided missiles and countermeasures and to bring these steps to the notice of the Committee on Defense Questions and Armaments, and to establish directives concerning the utilization of strategic nuclear weapons in the possession of member countries. The application of these directives, according to the resolution, were in the event of emergency to be the responsibility of the member states in possession of these weapons.

Western European Union

1962 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 662-662 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
European Economic Community ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Detailed Comparison ◽  
European Security ◽  
Full Member ◽  
Relative Prices ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Western European

The Assembly of the Western European Union (WEU) held the second part of its seventh ordinary session in Paris on December 11–15, 1961, under the presidency of Mr. Arthur Conte (French Socialist). In addition to discussing the state of European security, the Assembly debated questions concerning Berlin and the agricultural problems involved in the accession of the United Kingdom to the European Economic Community (EEC). The debate on agriculture was concerned with the implementation of recommendation 53, adopted in November 1960, in which the Assembly had called for negotiations for the accession of the United Kingdom to the EEC as a full member. Mr. Sicco Mansholt, vice-chairman of the EEC Commission, stated that if the United Kingdom entered the EEC, her agriculture would not have to overcome any exceptional difficulties which would justify a longer transition period than that of the six original members. He stated that this conclusion had been reached after a detailed comparison of relative prices and outputs in the United Kingdom and the six members of EEC. The Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution, presented by Mr. Hubert Leynen (Belgian Social Christian), calling upon the seven member governments of WEU to spare no effort to insure the success of the Brussels negotiations.

Western European Union

1957 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 572-577
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
The State ◽  
Sufficient Information ◽  
Not Given ◽  
The West ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Western European ◽  
German Contribution

The second part of the second ordinary session of the Assembly of the Western European Union (WEU) was held in Strasbourg from October 11 to 13, 1956, under the chairmanship of Mr. J. S. Maclay (United Kingdom). Following examination of a report presented by its General Affairs Committee, the Assembly adopted three recommendations to the WEU Council, concerning, respectively, cultural matters, WEU's activities in the Saar, and social questions. On October 12, the Assembly discussed the state of European defense, on the basis of a report presented by Mr. J. J. Fens (Netherlands, Popular Catholic). Following its debate, the Assembly adopted two further recommendations. The first called upon the Council to take an immediate decision concerning the nature of the reorganization of western defensive forces, and to give a clear lead to public opinion in the matter; it continued that it must be accepted that substantial conventional forces be retained in order to meet all eventualities, and that the west German contribution to European defense should be made effective as soon as possible. In the second recommendation, the Assembly expressed its belief that it could not hold an informed debate unless, with due regard to the requirements of security, all the documentation necessary was made available, and recommended that the Council urgently review its interpretation of the Brussels Treaty as regarded WEU's function in that field. The latter resolution, according to press reports, followed a debate marked by a sense of frustration, with nearly all the speakers complaining that the Council had not given the Assembly's defense committee sufficient information on which to base recommendations. A majority of the continental deputies were reported to favor the Council's becoming responsible to the Assembly, rather than to member governments, for its decisions, but they were reported to realize that the United Kingdom parliament would never accept the consequent limitation of sovereignty. However, in the meantime, the feeling was reported to be that governments could still do much to strengthen WEU.

Preservative or Transformative? Theorizing the U.K. Constitution Using Comparative Method

2020 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 412-440
Author(s):  
Jo Eric Khushal Murkens
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
The State ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Multilevel Systems ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Comparative Constitutional Law ◽  
The Stability

Abstract The complexities of the United Kingdom’s decision to withdraw from the European Union while simultaneously honoring its prior commitments to its decentralized, autonomous, and constituent regions have put constitutional questions back on the map. The dominant approach analyzes these questions premised on the “preservative” view of the constitution. This view prioritizes the stability and continuity of the institutions in Westminster (Parliament) and Whitehall (central executive). However, the preservative view of the constitution is theoretically and practically deficient as it cannot give an account of the multipolar and decentralized developments of the past twenty years. Another interpretation regards the legal and political changes to the constitution as “transformative.” This view accentuates the fragility of the U.K. constitution due to a plurality of constitutional rules and the ongoing processes of devolution of powers within multilevel systems of government. This Article discusses that evolution of the U.K. constitution through the prism of comparative constitutional law and its appropriate methodology. The preservative model of the constitution favors a universalist method, whereas the transformative model requires a contextualist method. I argue that the experience of supranational (European Union) and infranational (devolution) power sharing has fundamentally altered the United Kingdom’s central constitutional concepts. To stabilize its fragmentary forces, the United Kingdom needs to adopt concepts that reflect the state as divided, the constitution as transitional, sovereignty as an attribute of the state rather than Parliament, and democracy as conflicted. Nothing less than the future of the United Kingdom as a state is at stake.

Western European Union

1957 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 202-204
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Western European

The first part of the second session of the Assembly of Western European Union (WEU) was held in Strasbourg from April 23 to 25, 1956, under the presidency of Mr. John Maday, President of the Assembly (United Kingdom, National Liberal and Conservative). Mr. Maclay read to the Assembly a letter he had received from Mr. Guy Mollet (Prime Minister of France) in which the latter, regretting that he had been unable to attend the session, pledged that France would support all initiatives tending to strengthen WEU, in particular in the cultural and social spheres. A draft order of business was presented to the Assembly for consideration and was accepted.

Western European Union

1958 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 552-553 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Central Europe ◽  
Military Policy ◽  
European Security ◽  
Form Part ◽  
Western Germany ◽  
Western European ◽  
The Military ◽  
Fourth Session ◽  
De La Vallée Poussin

The first part of the fourth session of the Assembly of the Western European Union (WEU) was held July 2–5, 1958, in Paris, under the presidency of Sir James Hutchison (United Kingdom, Conservative). In the course of its discussion of military questions, the Assembly debated three reports and took note of a communication by M. Etienne de la Vallée Poussin (Belgium, Social Christian) on the responsibility of WEU in military policy. After its consideration of the request for an opinion from the Consultative Assembly on the military implications of regional or limited disarmament or of the policy of disengagement in central Europe, the Assembly adopted a resolution rejecting the Rapacki Plan and stating that disengagement which implied a withdrawal of United States and Soviet troops would be highly dangerous to the west unless it took place under certain express conditions, one of these being that neutralization of western Germany could not form part of such a policy. The Assembly also adopted a resolution and a recommendation on WEU's contribution to the production of armaments within the Atlantic alliance; the resolution allowed for the creation of a committee of investigation of five members, to be nominated by the Presidential Committee. In connection with the state of European security the Council approved by 50 votes to 6, with 8 abstentions, a recommendation from its defense committee calling for a minimum land force in central Europe of 30 divisions, with tactical nuclear weapons. There was to be no reduction in the contribution of member states, according to the recommendation, and they were to bring their contingents up to the agreed level.

scholarly journals PRACTICAL ASPECTS OF CUSTOMS AFFAIRS: EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION ON COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF GOODS

2019 ◽  
pp. 119-123
Author(s):  
V.Р. Zhdanova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
Exchange Of Information

Today, for the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine, one of the priority areas of international customs cooperation is cooperation with the customs authorities of other countries on the fulfillment of the terms of current free trade agreements. In this context, the exchange of information on the country of origin of goods moving across the customs border of Ukraine is of particular importance, which is one of the important factors for intensifying trade between Ukraine and the European Union. The Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union defines a number of obligations that Ukraine must fulfill in order to harmonize national legislation with the requirements of the relevant legislation of the European Union. Please note that there are now over 400 аgreements about free trade and preferential trade agreements that reduce customs tariffs on certain goods, provided they meet the specified origin criteria. However, many participants in foreign economic activity ignore the fact that they may claim tariff preferences or are uninformed in determining whether the goods they buy or sell are entitled to preferential treatment. As a result, many international trade participants pay a fee for goods originating in countries that are parties to the Free Trade Agreements, losing a financial advantage over their competitors. However, many exporters also lose business opportunities, and micro, small and medium-sized enterprises are particularly affected. This article is aimed at exploring the main aspects of legal and organizational support for the exchange of information on issues of the country of origin of goods in the course of customs in Ukraine. The author also intends to explore aspects of international cooperation of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine with other customs authorities in determining the country of origin of goods moving across the customs border of Ukraine. Determine the possibility of further application of the preferential conditions provided for in the Free Trade Agreements concluded with the participation of Ukraine in the prevention, detection, and/or termination of customs-related violations of the origin of goods. Keywords. information, exchange of information, product, country of origin of the product, international trade.

The Western European Union (WEU)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxime H. A. Larivé
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Defense Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Security ◽  
Gulf Region ◽  
European Continent ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Western European ◽  
The Eu

This empirical and historical analysis of the Western European Union (WEU), an intergovernmental defense organization, contributes to the broader understanding of the construction and integration of European security and defense policy. The WEU was established in 1954 by the Modified Brussels Treaty after the failure of the European Defense Community and at the time of the construction of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Over its lifetime, the WEU was confronted by two major trends: the centrality of collective defense agreement providing security on the European continent enforced by NATO and the construction of a European security and defense policy within the broad integration process of the European Union (EU). The WEU provided a platform for Western European powers, particularly France, the United Kingdom, and Germany, to engage in the construction of a European defense. Historically, these countries had diverging visions ranging from an autonomous force to one that should remain under the NATO auspice. The end of the Cold War accelerated the transfer of the WEU mission to the EU, but the crises in the Gulf region and in the Balkans in 1990s led to a period of activity for the WEU. The institutionalization of the EU, beginning with the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht, accelerated the construction of a European defense and security policy within EU structures. The transfer from the WEU to the EU began in the late 1990s and the WEU was dissolved in 2011.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document