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.

SOCIAL RIGHTS OF THE POLES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AFTER BREXIT

2020 ◽  
Vol 556 (7) ◽  
pp. 12-17
Author(s):  
Paweł Kaleta
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Social

Withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union (Brexit) has definitely been bringing various consequences in the field of social security. It is therefore worthwhile to analyse it from the point of view of the social rights of Poles residing in the United Kingdom (as well as, in a comparative and auxiliary manner, of the British residing in Poland), following the formal conclusion of the withdrawal. The article therefore synthetically presents this current, post-Brexit situation, taking into account the ongoing transition period as well as the perspective of negotiations on the possible agreement(s) on future EU-UK relations. Notably, the rights in question have been preserved in the transition period, but their status afterwards remains open.

scholarly journals Does Brexit Spell the Death of Transnational Law?

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (S1) ◽  
pp. 51-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralf Michaels
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
European Economic Community ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Economic Community ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Transnational Law ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk

Philip Jessup would not be pleased. Exactly sixty years after he published his groundbreaking book onTransnational Law, a majority of voters in the United Kingdom decided they wanted none of that. By voting for the UK to leave the European Union, they rejected what may well be called the biggest and most promising project of transnational law. Indeed, the European Union (including its predecessor, the European Economic Community), is nearly as old Jessup's book. Both are products of the same time. That invites speculation that goes beyond the immediate effects of Brexit: Is the time of transnational law over? Or can transnational law be renewed and revived?

THE IMPACT OF BREXIT ON BRITISH-EUROPEAN RELATIONS

Moldoscopie ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 34-42
Author(s):  
Svetlana Cebotari ◽  
◽  
Carolina Budurina-Goreacii ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
European Community ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Security ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Overseas Territories ◽  
The Impact

The exit of Great Britain from the European Union, “Brexit”, respectively “British exit”, has become one of the most important processes that trouble and concern the European world and not only. The impact of Brexit on British-European relations is considerable. Withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Community. were argued by a series of arguments that can be grouped according to three major considerations: economic, political and security. Analyzing Brexit, it can be seen that the separation of the United Kingdom from the European Union is a phenomenon that can only bring disadvantages to both parties, as well as European security. Regarding the security of the two entities, Brexit is considered as a risk, but also an opportunity for Great Britain, as well as for the states of the European Union. This article aims to highlight the main consequences of Brexit on British-European relations, including the British Overseas Territories.

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

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.

Western European Union

1963 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 827-827 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Common Market ◽  
Transitional Period ◽  
Political Union ◽  
Community Institution ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Qualified Majority ◽  
Ministerial Council ◽  
Western European

The first part of the eighth ordinary session of the Assembly of the Western European Union (WEU) took place in Paris from June 4 to 8, 1962. Mr. Arthur Conte (French Socialist) was re-elected President. In addition to the usual reports on defense questions, the Assembly took up the question of the negotiations between the European Common Market and the United Kingdom. On the solution of the Commonwealth problem in the negotiations, the Assembly recommended that special provisions should be worked out to cover a transitional period for imported foodstuffs, especially from the temperate zone. On political union, the Assembly's recommendation proposed that it should take the form of a Community institution, with an executive independent of the member states and responsible to an elected assembly and a ministerial council voting in some cases by qualified majority.

scholarly journals GIBRALTAR AND BREXIT

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 445-454
Author(s):  
V.V. Pushkareva
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
Customs Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Territorial Dispute ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union with its overseas possessions returned to the political agenda the territorial dispute between Madrid and London over the Gibraltar semi-enclave. The opposite points of view have collided in the context of Brexit: the UK fundamentally defends its sovereignty over Gibraltar, Spain strives to regain the lost territory, the Gibraltarians want to maintain association with the Kingdom and not break with the European Union, the European Union is not eager to grant Gibraltar a special status, but at the same time is interested in maintaining a preferential financial zone in the South of the Iberian Peninsula. Separate issues of relations between the UK and Spain on the situation of Gibraltar for the transition period were agreed, they are set out in the “4 Memoranda”. The further fate of the territory depends on the UK's deal with the EU. The contracting parties guarantee that the interests of both Spain and Gibraltar are taken into account. Possible options: holding a referendum on the independence of Gibraltar; gaining control of Spain over the strategic objects of Gibraltar as a result of the deal; Gibraltar remains under the sovereignty of the United Kingdom and continues to cooperate with the EU; dual Spanish-British sovereignty will be established over Gibraltar; at the end of Brexit Gibraltar will not cooperate with the EU. But each of the proposed solutions requires certain concessions from the disputing parties. They are not ready to compromise yet. The authorities of Gibraltar, however, are aware that without cooperation with the UK, Spain and the European Union, their further successful state and development is impossible. More favorable conditions, in our opinion, for the Gibraltarians will arise with the accession to the Schengen area and the Customs Union.

Western European Union

1960 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 363-365 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Foreign Minister ◽  
Clearing House ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Political Role ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Western European ◽  
Council Of Ministers

The Assembly of Western European Union (WEU) held the second part of its fifth ordinary session in Paris from November 30 to December 3, 1959. The President of the Assembly Mr. Victoria Badini- Confalonieri (Italian Liberal), opened the first sitting with a tribute to the late John Edwards, following with an examination of the history and functions of WEU in the light of proposed changes of the organization's functions. He stated that the European Economic Community (EEC) of the Six and the Union of the Seven were complementary, rather than incompatible, as WEU's Council of Ministers could become a ”clearing house” for relations between the Six and the United Kingdom, the only member of WEU that was not a member of EEC. He expressed the hope that at the next meeting of the Council of Ministers the question of the new political role of WEU would be the chief matter considered. Mr. Giuseppe Pella, Italian Foreign Minister, speaking as Chairman-in-Office of the WEU Council, stated that the Council of Ministers attached great importance to coll-laboration with the Assembly; noting that relations between the Council and the Assembly had improved since the creation of the organization, he went onto list areas that the Council had considered or was considering which concerned both organs, namely: 1) measures which would allow the Assembly a more direct share in the adoption of its budget; 2) the area of armament production; 3) the search for permanent offices for WEU; and 4) the question of transferring WEU's exercise of social and cultural activities to the Council of Europe. Regarding the latter, he stated that, in agreeing to the transfer, the Council wished merely to reduce duplication and not to detract from the Union's independence. Finally, he stressed that consultation among the Six should lead to political consultation with the United Kingdom in the WEU context, rather than ruling it out.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document