Organization for European Economic Cooperation

1960 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 359-360 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
West Germany ◽  
Trade Association ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Underdeveloped Countries ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Free Trade Association ◽  
Set Up

The January 14, 1960, meeting of the Council of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) was preceded by a meeting of representatives of the organization's eighteen members and of the United States and Canada to examine the resolutions adopted by a special economic conference. At this meeting, which ended with approval of a move sponsored by the United States that was designed to reorganize economic cooperation and transform the organization, it was decided, and subsequently approved by the OEEC Council and the United States and Canada, that: 1) four experts, representing respectively North America, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), the European Economic Community (EEC) and other European nations, would prepare a report on the transformation of OEEC for consideration by senior officials of twenty countries, namely, the OEEC nations and the United States and Canada, at a meeting scheduled for April 19, 1960; 2) a preparatory meeting of representatives of the same twenty nations would be held in a month's time, when decisions would be taken to appoint a permanent chairman, a secretariat, and working parties to look into outstanding trade problems; and 3) a group, consisting of Canada, France, West Germany, Italy, Portugal, Belgium, the United States, the United Kingdom, and a representative of EEC, would be informally set up to coordinate aid policies to underdeveloped countries. The outcome of the discussions was regarded as paving the way for a new Atlantic economic grouping, composed of the members of OEEC plus the United States and Canada, which would give priority to consideration of the problems between the two rival European economic groups, EEC and EFTA. Other matters discussed by the Council were the removal of discriminatory measures against imports from the dollar zone and the increase in assistance to underdeveloped countries.

Relief and Rehabilitation Organizations: Committee of European Economic Cooperation

1948 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 158-160
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
Harvard University ◽  
Joint Conference ◽  
European Economic ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Soviet Union

On June 5, 1947, the Secretary of State of the United States, George C. Marshall, stated that the United States could not proceed much further with its plans to assist European recovery unless the countries themselves reached some agreement as to their requirements and to their own contribution to European recovery. Immediately following this speech at Harvard University, representatives of the United Kingdom, France and the Soviet Union met in Paris to discuss the possibility of a joint conference on the problem. After the Soviet representative (Molotov) withdrew, sixteen nations, upon the invitation of France and the United Kingdom, met in Paris from July 12 to September 22, 1947, to draw up a joint program for European reconstruction. Participating countries were: United Kingdom, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

1962 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 254-255 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
West Germany ◽  
Finance Minister ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Ministerial Council ◽  
Oecd Convention ◽  
International Obligations

The press reported that on September 30, 1961, the new Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) formally came into being with seventeen out of a possible twenty member nations having. deposited their instruments of ratification of the OECD convention. At the time of the entry into force of the convention, the following nations had deposited their ratifications: Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States, and West Germany. Italy, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg shortly afterwards joined the organization. The OECD convention required members to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, nondiscriminatory basis in accord with international obligations. At the first meeting of the organization in Paris on September 30, 1961, Mr. Donald Fleming, Canadian Finance Minister, was elected chairman of the Ministerial Council, and Mr. Gunnar Lange, Swedish Commerce Minister, and Mr. Charles Arliotis, Greek Minister of Coordination, vice-chairmen. Mr. Thorkil Kristensen, the former Secretary-General of OEEC, was named Secretary-General of the new organization, and Mr. Charles Adair (United States) and Mr. Jean Cottier (France) were designated deputy Secretaries-General.

Organization for European Economic Cooperation

1949 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 739-741
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Trade ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
Trade Surplus ◽  
European Economic ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Bilateral Agreement ◽  
Trade Credits ◽  
Liberal Trade

In July 1949, negotiations for a European payments agreement to finance international trade, which had been delayed by a dispute between the United Kingdom and the United States over currency convertibility, were blocked by a difference between the Swiss and the United States governments regarding the terms of Switzerland's participation. The Swiss government had refused to sign the bilateral agreement with the United States which all other members of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation receiving dollar aid had done, on the ground that it needed no dollar aid for itself and that the bilateral agreement would give the United States a right to check on the Swiss economy. The payments committee of the OEEC Council had attempted to bring Switzerland into the payments plan to widen the area of more liberal trade, urged by the United States. The committee's proposal that half of Switzerland's trade surplus be financed by a grant of dollars and half by trade credits on the terms of the Economic Cooperation Administration as advanced by Switzerland to her debtors was submitted to the Swiss Federal Council. Following the statement by the Economic Cooperation Administration that dollars could not be had without signature by Switzerland of a bilateral accord with the United States, the Swiss Federal Council refused to sign the accord.

European Free Trade Association

1960 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-484
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
European Economic Community ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Government ◽  
Trade Association ◽  
European Economic ◽  
European Free Trade Association ◽  
States Government ◽  
Ministerial Council

At a meeting of senior officials of the seven-nation European Free Trade Association (EFTA) held in London, February 12–13, 1960, the organization was reported to have chosen Geneva as the site of its headquarters, after the French government had informed it that it could not accept the proposal that Paris be the site, since France was not a member of EFTA. Although EFTA did not officially come into being until May 3, 1960, with the deposition of the seven instruments of ratification with the Swedish government, the preparatory meeting of its Ministerial Council was held in Vienna on March 11–12, devoting itself principally to an examination of the most important problem facing this new organization—namely, its relations with third countries, especially those of the European Economic Community (EEC). The member states declared their readiness to discuss with the EEC members the possible extension to the Six and to other countries, subject to reciprocity, of the 20-percent tariff reduction effective among themselves on July 1, 1960, and reaffirmed the importance of a continuation of European economic cooperation within the framework of the Organization for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC), of which they would like to see the United States and Canada become full members. Also in March, EFTA members reportedly received the assurance of the United States government that its approval of a recent decision of EEC, concerning the reduction of its external tariff on July 1, 1960, did not reflect any animosity toward the Association.

European Communities

1960 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 350-355
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Association ◽  
New Members ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
European Free Trade Association ◽  
The World ◽  
General Improvement ◽  
The Creation

Meeting from September 22 to 25, 1959, the European Parliamentary Assembly discussed the principles and problems involved in the establishment of a multilateral European trading association. Opening the debate, Mr. M. P. A. Blaisse (Dutch Popular Catholic) stated that experience had shown that the common market could be considered the driving force of European economic integration. Although at present involving only a part of Europe, it could expand and develop in several ways—by the accession of new members, by the creation of a multilateral association, or by the conclusion of bilateral agreements. Whatever the form of its evolution, the obligations undertaken by member states within the framework of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) could not be ignored; similarly, it was imperative to take into account the interests of the United States and Canada. Thus he suggested that special agreements could be concluded with these two countries, to minimize the effects of trade discrimination, along with continued negotiations with members of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). He warned against compromise on the final aim, namely, the establishment of a multilateral association. The President of the European Economic Commission, Mr. W. Hallstein, thereupon presented the Commission's recommendations for a trade program on which the six nations could agree. He stated that such a program had to be pragmatic and realistic, and fulfill several conditions: improvement of economic conditions of the nations both inside and outside the European Economic Community (EEC), taking into account Europe's relations with the rest of the world, in particular with the United States; strengthening of the feelings of solidarity between the Community and all those affected by its external commercial policy; and general improvement of trade relations. He urged that care be taken to avoid giving the impression that EEC practiced a policy of discrimination and asked therefore that every effort be made to prove that its aim was the liberalization of trade throughout the world. Specifically, after the next GATT conference, EEC should, in his opinion, forthwith give its agreement to further tariff reductions and, in addition, promote the granting of aid to underdeveloped countries. At the European level, he proposed the creation of a “contact committee, comprised of representatives of the Community and other countries or groups to study the question of the development of external commercial relations. Mr. Hallstein concluded by pointing out that the proposals of his Commission were neither complete nor final. The speakers that followed agreed, on the whole, with the above-mentioned suggestions, but no resolution was adopted and it was decided to re-examine the whole matter at future sessions.

An Empirical Review of the Design and Performance of Icebreakers

1989 ◽  
Vol 26 (02) ◽  
pp. 145-159
Author(s):  
R. A. Dick ◽  
J. E. Laframboise
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
The United States ◽  
West Germany ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Ship Performance ◽  
Selection Of

This paper utilizes available data on existing icebreaking ships to compile a review of the design features that influence ship performance. The data were extracted from a recently completed review of the state of the art of Arctic ship technology and include icebreaking ships from Argentina, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Japan, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, the United States, and West Germany. It is the aim of this paper to offer guidance in the initial stages of icebreaker design and thereby give confidence to the designer in the selection of dimensions, hull shape and propulsion.

Organization for European Economic Cooperation

1950 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 342-346
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
Marshall Plan ◽  
Total Production ◽  
International Investments ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Inflationary Pressure ◽  
United States Economy

In February 1950 the annual report of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation was presented to the United States Economic Cooperation Administration. The report stated that future progress of European recovery would depend to a large extent upon the level of economic activity in the United States, upon United States tariff policy; and upon international investments made by the United States. The forecasts of European trade were based on the assumption that United States business activity would remain at least as high as in the second and third quarter of 1949; it was pointed out that even small setbacks in the United States economy would have disproportionately large consequences for western Europe whose reserves were not great enough to stand much strain. The report insisted that what remained to be done to solve the dollar problem was not a task for Europe alone but was rather a “joint problem.” Western Europe's dollar deficit could not be eliminated unless its exports to the United States amounted to 75 percent of its imports in value. It was necessary that the emphasis shift from the expansion of total production to the development of dollar earning and dollar saving types of production, as well as a reduction in costs. Inflationary pressure had been greatly relieved but nearly all the Marshall Plan countries were still suffering from some inflationary pressure which tended to reduce their exports and increase their imports. This pressure was likely to continue unless a world depression developed.

Marketing Negotiations in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States

1988 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel C. G. Campbell ◽  
John L. Graham ◽  
Alain Jolibert ◽  
Hans Gunther Meissner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The United States ◽  
West Germany ◽  
Laboratory Simulation ◽  
The United Kingdom

The determinants of marketing negotiations in four cultures are investigated in a laboratory simulation. One hundred thirty-eight businesspeople from the United States, 48 from France, 44 from West Germany, and 44 from the United Kingdom participated in two-person, buyer-seller negotiation simulations. The American process of negotiation is found to be different from that of the Europeans in several respects.

Organization for European Economic Cooperation

1956 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 507-508
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Raw Materials ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
American Military ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Appreciable Increase ◽  
Substantial Progress ◽  
Manufactured Goods

A report of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) on the relaxation of quantitative restrictions on imports of goods and restrictions on invisible transactions and transfers relating to the dollar area was made public during the period under review. The report was based on the replies of OEEC countries to a questionnaire approved by the OEEC Council, and on memoranda submitted by the two associate members, Canada and the United States. According to the report, substantial progress had been made since 1953 in the liberalization of imports from the dollar area and the relaxation of quantitative restrictions on imports of non-freed dollar commodities, with the extent and rapidity of the progress varying from one country to another. In general, the level of liberalization had been less for manufactured goods than for food and raw materials. In analyzing the effects of liberalization, the report stated that the very appreciable increase in dollar imports of raw materials and basic commodities had been not so much the result of liberalization itself as of the increased economic activity in member countries; and that on the whole, there had not been any sudden large-scale increase in imports from the dollar area of manufactured goods which had been freed by some countries. Since the imports of freed commodities from the United States and Canada had taken place against the background of a general increase in member countries' imports, there had not been generally any adverse change in the pattern of imports, particularly in regard to intra-European imports or those from other non-dollar countries. Nevertheless, the report stated, the increase in imports had contributed to the deterioration of the trade balance of member countries with the associated countries during the second half of 1954 and the first half of 1955, since exports to these countries did not rise above the 1953 level. However, because of increased American military expenditure in Europe, the current balance of member countries as a whole with the associated countries still showed a slight surplus.

The Dialectics of Supranational Unification

1962 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 927-935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amitai Etzioni
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Resources ◽  
Trade Association ◽  
Customs Union ◽  
New Members ◽  
European Free Trade Association ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Political Communities

The application of several European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries for membership in the Common Market (EEC) is viewed in Washington with great pleasure: the development of a United States of Europe is widely anticipated. Many observers have already calculated the combined manpower, economic resources, military power, etc. of the new union, and have pointed to the decisive advantage the United States, in coalition with this “third power,” will have over the Soviet Union. Even the fact that the EEC and EFTA, if completely merged, would have 13 members is not considered unlucky: after all, the United States itself evolved out of a union of 13. It may however, be premature to prepare a celebration for the birthday of the United States of Europe. The following theoretical excursion suggests that loading the EEC with new members may well reduce it to the level of a glorified customs union rather than forward it to a political federation. Moreover, I shall argue, political communities often unify not by increasing their membership, but in a dialectic fashion: two or more groups form; they appear to be moving in opposite directions until each is well integrated, then they are “synthesized” (not merged) in a superior union. That is, they form one encompassing union without dissolving the bonds that held together the units that composed a group before the larger unification. The earlier autonomous groups become sub-groups in one union, adjusting to the new over-riding bond without being fused into one group that knows no internal divisions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document