Denmark doesn't join ECC in 1973: Ramifications on post-Maastricht Nordic countries

Dr. No · Dec 5, 2015

On the one hand, we have Denmark that got almost as generous opt-outs from various EU duties as Britain. Then we have Norway that never joined at all. Then we have Sweden that has no opt-outs, but didn't join the Euro anyway. And the Danish people said Nej! in a referendum about partaking in Europol.

What if only Britain and Ireland joined the ECC in 1973, but Denmark would've said Nej! just as much as Norway?

How would it have affected a 1995-style enlargement after the end of the Iron Curtain and the evolution of the ECC into the EU as per OTL?

Dr. No · Dec 11, 2015

*bump* *bump*

Simon · Dec 11, 2015

As I understand it Denmark joined because the UK did and the amount of trade they had, Norway has their oil to fall back on. If you want the UK to join but not Denmark then I think you'd need to switch a large part of Denmark's trade to another non-member country in the 1950s and '60s, would Sweden be a large enough alternative because that's the only candidate that I can think of?

Charles RB · Dec 12, 2015

I don't see this affecting much for the EU, except now it'll be trying to schmooze Denmark into joining just as much as the post-Soviet nations.

Jurgen Wullenwever · Dec 12, 2015

What difference does it make on the ground? There was trade between EEC and EFTA, so Denmark would not have to join just because the Brits did.

Perhaps EFTA might not bother to join the EU at all.

oreocruncher · Dec 12, 2015

Wait...
Wasn't Denmark back then more willing to join the EEC than the UK/Ireland were?

Dathi THorfinnsson · Jan 30, 2016

Simon said:
As I understand it Denmark joined because the UK did and the amount of trade they had, Norway has their oil to fall back on. If you want the UK to join but not Denmark then I think you'd need to switch a large part of Denmark's trade to another non-member country in the 1950s and '60s, would Sweden be a large enough alternative because that's the only candidate that I can think of?

Norway had oil so she could AFFORD to stay out, and fisheries so she WANTED to.

Denmark had neither. I don't really see Denmark staying out.

Devvy · Jan 30, 2016

Dathi THorfinnsson said:
Norway had oil so she could AFFORD to stay out, and fisheries so she WANTED to.

Denmark had neither. I don't really see Denmark staying out.

I agree with Dathi. Even back then, Danish economy had a strong agricultural twist - currently about 20% of Danish exports are agricultural. Considering EFTA had no agricultural side to it, you'd be hard pressed to find a reason to not join the EEC/EU with the UK. The referendum also yielded a 63.3% "Yes" vote, so you'd need quite a swing to follow the Norwegian route.

However....if it did.....

Considering that a Nordic Economic Community, along EEC lines was seriously negotiated over several times in the 20th Century, I'd imagine there to be more serious exploration of this concept. The 5 Nordic states could easily hook up together; they all (bar Finland) speak an almost common language (Iceland a little further out, but still), have similar political and cultural concepts, and have a strongly shared history. They also strongly act in a shared interest and follow common rules.

I'd see Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Iceland forming a "NEC", with Finland joining later when the Soviet Union becomes less of an issue. Possibility of Estonia and Latvia joining later. Shared customs union and the pre-existing passport union, along with probably shared currency in the 1990s due to the small number of closely related countries. Strong free trade pact with the EU, and simplified visa regime for visitors in either direction.

ivanotter · Jan 30, 2016

All,

There was some sort of 'intimidation' going at that time. Vote Yes because if UK is in and if we are not in, the bacon export will go South, we will all lose our jobs, and the weather will be even worse (along those lines).

The Nordic Union had been attempted, but did not go anywhere. The differences were too big to overcome. One of them was the Swedish neutrality.

It is probably also true that although the three Nordic countries are similar in many ways, the underlying economical realities are different.

Sweden was heavy industry, Norway was farming and Denmark was all kind of things at the same time.

So, on that background:

If UK had joined and Denmark had said NO (and it was close), it is doubtful if Denmark could have secured its traditional UK markets via any treaty.

Denmark was starting out with a lot of feta export to Middle East and would have had to find new markets.

Obviously, bacon to Middle East would not have been the biggest market, but there would have been a lot of other agri products.

If I am not mistaken, chicken is sold to Middle East as Danish chicken is Halaal.

... and in 1973 agriculture was still dominant in Denmark.

Could Denmark had aligned itself towards Middle East? Maybe and that would opened a lot of other opportunities

Ivan

Devvy · Jan 30, 2016

ivanotter said:
The Nordic Union had been attempted, but did not go anywhere. The differences were too big to overcome. One of them was the Swedish neutrality.

It is probably also true that although the three Nordic countries are similar in many ways, the underlying economical realities are different.

Sweden was heavy industry, Norway was farming and Denmark was all kind of things at the same time.

There are differences to overcome, but I don't think any are particularly difficult. The differences in the EU are bigger and were overcome.

EFTA largely didn't have an agricultural context because of the UK's desire to continue importing food from the Commonwealth; after the UK leaves, it's open to negotiation at the least.

I agree that Danish agriculture, Swedish industry, and Norwegian farming/fishing will take some balance. I think there was broad agreement from last time I opened the textbooks on this in research, but the stumbling block was the speed of opening the borders to a full custom union (thus time for markets to adapt), and the size of a subsidy to Norway to help it's economy adjust to the onslaught of Sweden, and to a lesser extent Denmark. The Nordic Passport Union already exists for free movement of people, and I could easily see a common currency being reintroduced - the monetary union is less then 100 years ago which de facto introduced mutually acceptable currency. A Nordic Krone if Finland isn't there to object at day one.

All the building blocks were there for a Nordic economic community, it just got dropped because Denmark and Norway decided to join the EEC/EU (even if Norway rejected it), and then Finland and Sweden joined.

Danish agriculture will need new export markets; the Middle East is one option as you say. But everyone adapts; Norway & Finland may not be the biggest markets, but pork and dairy products won't be the easiest thing to make domestically, and as such with an open border, Danish produce will be welcome.

arctic warrior · Jan 31, 2016

With a 90,1 % outturn of electorate of which 63,4 % was pro-EEC and 36,6 against it was hardly a close run thing.

J.O. Krag the premier at the time saw this as his last major job before stepping down and made it. It had been on the Socialdemocratic agenda since the post-WWII years and yes the bacon export to Britain was a major incentive and lever. The spectre of Commonwealth nations taking over the Danish export always lurking in the shadows.

Denmark was the major agricultural producer in Scandinavia and it would be difficult to find a market substitute for Britain; the other Scandinavian countries being at a fraction of the British market. The second market at the time was West Germany and Sweden coming up third.

Feta and poultry exports to the Middle East was in its infancy at the time and really - nobody in Denmark had heard of Halal at the time. It was as alien a concept as Islam tho' had it become an issue Danish exporters would have found a way out.

There was a vociferous group of nay-sayers should they have been able to make it a no-go Denmark would have to not only find a substitute for the British but probably the German market too. The Dutch would only be too happy to take up the challenge.

The ME market was a sideshow at the time that was only being cultivated.
Essentially Denmark would have to conjure up a 100 million consumers market to stay in business post at a no.

Even if a NEC should be possible Denmark would have to rebuild its exports industries; a costly and difficult process and hit by the oil-crisis of 1973 it would be a free fall in devaluation and unemployment though of course nobody could foretell that in the day and age.
Surely would be something of a dark age.

Julius Vogel · Jan 31, 2016

Reorientation of agricultural exports takes a lot of work and it very much is a long term project. NZ was working in that strongly from the 50s and even then still had vast difficulties dealing with the UK accession to the EEC. Arguably it didn't really succeed properly till the 1990s.

Denmark would likely have similar problems

arctic warrior · Jan 31, 2016

I quite agree but the only western 100 million consumers market in the day and age would be the USA and the role of the Danish PMs wife a month prior to referendum as a variete show as a red light district whore had made for bad press in that nation.

It would be a difficult situation.