No UK membership in EEC

WI UK decides not to enter then-EEC but rather focuses on EFTA. How does this affect both organisations? Would EEC evolve into EU we love (to)/ hate or would it stay simple common market organisation?

Depending on how EEC develops EFTA could become a viable alternative, rather than members looking for a way to get into EEC. or would EEC evolve into EU sooner while EFTA bocomes something similar on economic terms but with much less political integration, providing alternative for those countries that want more economic cooperation with other european countries butfear loss of identity and sovereignity.

Both organizations remove teriffs internally but keep them regarding each other? Or is their removal between them as well but as both organizations are simialr neither can swallow up the other nor induce members to "defect". assuming communism in E Europe collapses as per OTL (no reason why not) is there a race among them who seduces these countries sooner to join them, thus improving their psotion vis-a-vis other.

Thoughts?
 
Most countries left EFTA after the UK so maybe EFTA and the EEC become rivals with most of Northern Europe and a few others in EFTA and the rest in the EEC. The UK would still have a strong hold on New Zealand and Australia's trade along with more Commonwealth integration.

The EEC may become MORE federal without the more powerful Eurosceptic member though.
 
The EEC may become MORE federal without the more powerful Eurosceptic member though.

That's what I was thinking. Without strong euroscepticism EEC become politically integrated sooner and/or more so, while EFTA limits itself to economic integration only. While both organizations offer new members strong economic integration they can choose whether they want just that or want political integration as well. While EFTA would probably not opt for common currency (EEC might) they could opt for wider member's currency acceptance among themselves.
 
Most countries left EFTA after the UK so maybe EFTA and the EEC become rivals with most of Northern Europe and a few others in EFTA and the rest in the EEC. The UK would still have a strong hold on New Zealand and Australia's trade along with more Commonwealth integration.

The EEC may become MORE federal without the more powerful Eurosceptic member though.

I'd assume that at least some nordic countries would join the EEC. Finland even got the Euro IOTL.

Britain remaining in the EFTA strengthens them a lot. IOTL, the economic strength of the EEC simply became too much. This can be observed today as well: in many cases, Swiss legislation follows EU legislation - simply because their trade overwhelmingly goes through EU. Denmark is another example as they didn'T want to introduce the Euro, but keep their currency pegged at the Euro - which now results in the Danish central bank copying the steps of the ECB. With Britain out, the competing economic bloc is much larger, although for each single EFTA member including the UK trade with EEC members will probably still constitute the majority of foreign trade.
 

Eurofed

Banned
EFTA would remain a plausible (although rather less efficient in the end) alternative to EU economic integration for strongly Euroskeptic countries, although I seriously doubt they would go all the way to a common currency (perhaps fixed currency rates, but a true common currency requires far too integration to be palatable in the Euroskeptic club). Most likely, they keep a customs union with a partial single market (although, again, nowhere so deep-end as the EU one). Likely members would be UK, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland. Finland and Ireland are a toss-up, they may go in the EFTA or in the EU, but Finland at least is more likely to go in the EU. Austria and Portugal are practically sure to go in the EU, the alternative is almost ASB.

EU would make all OTL progresses at integration, and then much more, without the most powerful, influential, and downright Euroskeptic member fighting them every step of the way. We can almost surely expect military integration and foreign policy integration (issues where British opposition has been pivotal to delay substantial progress) by 2010. Fiscal integration and a more federal character of EU institutions are a bit less sure, but in all likelihood, we would see substantial progress in those areas, too. Sure EU members include France, Germany, Benelux, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Slovenia, Greece. Very, very likely ones include Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Croatia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, and Cyprus. Euroskepticism in those Eastern European countries is most likely trumped in the end by the greater economic and security advantages that EU integration provides. Malta, Finland, and the Baltic countries are also more likely to join the EU than the EFTA, although they could go both ways. Ireland is a true toss-up, because of Northern Ireland.
 
Last edited:
Eurofed

In general agreement but uncertain about the destinations of the eastern bloc after a Soviet collapse. Having just come out from ~50 years under a highly centralised and autocratic bloc some of them may have doubts about joining a more centralised EU. Especially probably Poland as the smaller EU will be more dominated by a reunified Germany and given the history between the two and the status of the former German lands?

Furthermore a more open EFTA rather than the EU may be more attractive if the latter also adopts the restricted rules for new entrants as OTL. [This presumes that Britain is still a more open society as OTL but so many butterflies can occur that a hell of a lot could be changed].

I think NATO will provide the political security that would greatly ease the main concern. Hence EU membership would be less vital to be being seen as part of the western camp.

Steve

EFTA would remain a plausible (although rather less efficient in the end) alternative to EU economic integration for strongly Euroskeptic countries, although I seriously doubt they would go all the way to a common currency (perhaps fixed currency rates, but a true common currency requires far too integration to be palatable in the Euroskeptic club). Most likely, they keep a customs union with a partial single market (although, again, nowhere so deep-end as the EU one). Likely members would be UK, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland. Finland and Ireland are a toss-up, they may go in the EFTA or in the EU, but Finland at least is more likely to go in the EU. Austria and Portugal are practically sure to go in the EU, the alternative is almost ASB.

EU would make all OTL progresses at integration, and then much more, without the most powerful, influential, and downright Euroskeptic member fighting them every step of the way. We can almost surely expect military integration and foreign policy integration (issues where British opposition has been pivotal to delay substantial progress) by 2010. Fiscal integration and a more federal character of EU institutions are a bit less sure, but in all likelihood, we would see substantial progress in those areas, too. Sure EU members include France, Germany, Benelux, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Slovenia, Greece. Very, very likely ones include Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Croatia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, and Cyprus. Euroskepticism in those Eastern European countries is most likely trumped in the end by the greater economic and security advantages that EU integration provides. Malta, Finland, and the Baltic countries are also more likely to join the EU than the EFTA, although they could go both ways. Ireland is a true toss-up, because of Northern Ireland.
 
Likely members would be UK, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland. Finland and Ireland are a toss-up, they may go in the EFTA or in the EU, but Finland at least is more likely to go in the EU. Austria and Portugal are practically sure to go in the EU, the alternative is almost ASB.

Just so you know, in OTL EFTA used to consist of:
  • the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
  • Norway (still is)
  • Iceland (still is, for now)
  • Switzerland (still is)
  • Austria
  • Portugal
  • Sweden
  • Finland
  • Denmark

So all of these, plus Lichtenstein (who only joined in 1991) and the Faroe Islands and maybe more, would be plausible.
 

Eurofed

Banned
Eurofed

In general agreement but uncertain about the destinations of the eastern bloc after a Soviet collapse. Having just come out from ~50 years under a highly centralised and autocratic bloc some of them may have doubts about joining a more centralised EU. Especially probably Poland as the smaller EU will be more dominated by a reunified Germany and given the history between the two and the status of the former German lands?

Furthermore a more open EFTA rather than the EU may be more attractive if the latter also adopts the restricted rules for new entrants as OTL. [This presumes that Britain is still a more open society as OTL but so many butterflies can occur that a hell of a lot could be changed].

I think NATO will provide the political security that would greatly ease the main concern. Hence EU membership would be less vital to be being seen as part of the western camp.

Steve

Eastern Europe joing EFTA instead of a quasi-federal EU is of course quite possible but not any really likely for several reasons:

Main economic links for those nations are with continental Western Europe, not with the UK or the Nordic countries, and EU redestribution policies (even stronger than OTL if there is fiscal integration) promise further economic benefits that the EFTA can't match.

From the PoV of post-Soviet Eastern Europe, there can hardly be such a thing as too many security guarantees against Russia, and in this regard NATO + EU with a common army is much better than NATO alone.

For the same reason as above, the USA is very likely to support their integration in the EU.

Although significant Euroskeptic movements do exist in some EE countries (Poland, Czechia, Hungary), so far they have consistently failed to hamper the progress of European integration in a significant way, differently from British and Nordic Euroskeptics.

Britain is not that important to prevent unchecked German domination within the EU. As long as France, Italy, and Spain are in the club, a balance of power exists within the EU. If anything, Poland has shown in the last half-decade that it may be another middle power that can effectively make its voice felt within the EU.

The status of the former German lands is a done deal and a non-issue since German reunification.

I won't say that the alternative of an EFTA Poland, Czechia, or Hungary is impossible, far from it, but it is much less likely than the EU membership, even if the EU goes much closer to federation thanks to the absence of Britain and Scandinavia. And if it happens, I totally expect that it is a temporary phase and they eventually switch from EFTA to EU.

As it concerns Romania and Bulgaria, and for that matter Greece, the only plausible reason for them going EFTA is if they are deemed so economically and socially screwed that they are flatly denied EU membership (and again, it is going to be a temporary stop in the end).

As it concerns Slovenia, Croatia, and Slovakia, I can't think of a plausible reason for them not going EU, if the breakups of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia still happen ITTL.
 
Last edited:

Eurofed

Banned
Just so you know, in OTL EFTA used to consist of:
  • the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
  • Norway (still is)
  • Iceland (still is, for now)
  • Switzerland (still is)
  • Austria
  • Portugal
  • Sweden
  • Finland
  • Denmark
So all of these, plus Lichtenstein (who only joined in 1991) and the Faroe Islands and maybe more, would be plausible.

So what ? Even East Germany and Spain didn't belong in the EU from the start. Yet, economic, political, and cultural ties between Portugal and Austria on one hand, and the rest of the EU core were, and are, so overwhelming, and the ones with the rest of the EFTA so flimsly in comparison (yeah, even the ones between Britain and Portugal, in late 20th century), that they are going to join the EU as soon as their respective stumbling blocks (non-democratic political system for Portugal, Cold War for Austria) are removed. The EFTA was just a consolation placeholder for those nations. The alternative is skirting ASB.
 
So what ? Even East Germany and Spain didn't belong in the EU from the start. Yet, economic, political, and cultural ties between Portugal and Austria on one hand, and the rest of the EU core were, and are, so overwhelming, and the ones with the rest of the EFTA so flimsly in comparison (yeah, even the ones between Britain and Portugal, in late 20th century), that they are going to join the EU as soon as their respective stumbling blocks (non-democratic political system for Portugal, Cold War for Austria) are removed. The EFTA was just a consolation placeholder for those nations. The alternative is skirting ASB.
I will say that Finland does not fall under that argument - the bulk of their trade is either with TTL's EFTA or with a state is a member of neither trading bloc, and, well, her political and cultural ties are primarily with the rest of the Nordic region... so in conclusion I would say that the toss-up is in favour of EFTA, not because of Finnish Euroscepticism, but because it simply isn't all that good a deal to join the EU in these circumstances - although, admittedly, my argument would be weakened if an EEA analogue comes to be.
 

Eurofed

Banned
I will say that Finland does not fall under that argument - the bulk of their trade is either with TTL's EFTA or with a state is a member of neither trading bloc, and, well, her political and cultural ties are primarily with the rest of the Nordic region... so in conclusion I would say that the toss-up is in favour of EFTA, not because of Finnish Euroscepticism, but because it simply isn't all that good a deal to join the EU in these circumstances - although, admittedly, my argument would be weakened if an EEA analogue comes to be.

Your argument has merit, but even mine acknowledges that Finland (and the Baltic states) might go either way because of the issues you quote, and I was arguing against EFTA Portugal/Austria, which skirt ASB. I would just deem that Finland (and the Baltic states) are more likely to go EU because of the security issue, but the issue is open to debate.
 
Your argument has merit, but even mine acknowledges that Finland (and the Baltic states) might go either way because of the issues you quote, and I was arguing against EFTA Portugal/Austria, which skirt ASB. I would just deem that Finland (and the Batlic) are more likely to go EU because of the security issue, but the issue is open to debate.
I'm not certain the security argument applies to Finland - to the Baltics, yes, but not to Finland. After all: the country successfully managed to keep its independence from the USSR, so Finland would have less reason to see a need for looking for additional security guarantees against Russia - if one compares to OTL, while the Baltic states have, indeed, entered into the NATO umbrella, Finland hasn't.
 

Eurofed

Banned
I'm not certain the security argument applies to Finland - to the Baltics, yes, but not to Finland. After all: the country successfully managed to keep its independence from the USSR, so Finland would have less reason to see a need for looking for additional security guarantees against Russia - if one compares to OTL, while the Baltic states have, indeed, entered into the NATO umbrella, Finland hasn't.

Again, your argument has merit. And of course, if Finland goes EFTA, it becomes more plausible for the Baltics to do so as well, although for them at least, it still remains a toss-up between EU and EFTA for economic (EU subsidies) and security reasons.
 

Eurofed

Banned
While I was giving second thoughts to the topic, I realized that we all missed a rather likely additional candidate for a successful EFTA: Turkey. If Western European countries keep the same deep-seated political qualms about EU membership of Turkey ITTL, and most likely they do, the EFTA is going to be a quite handy alternative for Ankara.
 
So what ? Even East Germany and Spain didn't belong in the EU from the start. Yet, economic, political, and cultural ties between Portugal and Austria on one hand, and the rest of the EU core were, and are, so overwhelming, and the ones with the rest of the EFTA so flimsly in comparison (yeah, even the ones between Britain and Portugal, in late 20th century), that they are going to join the EU as soon as their respective stumbling blocks (non-democratic political system for Portugal, Cold War for Austria) are removed. The EFTA was just a consolation placeholder for those nations. The alternative is skirting ASB.

Maybe if TTL EEC goes down EU road sooner and harder ex-communist (and in Balts case newly independant) may be reluctant to join it out of fear of loosing their newly gained sovereignity. "In the past it was Moscow, now it is Bussels". Less politically integrated EFTA offering simialr economic benefits may be more attractive alternative.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Maybe if TTL EEC goes down EU road sooner and harder ex-communist (and in Balts case newly independant) may be reluctant to join it out of fear of loosing their newly gained sovereignity. "In the past it was Moscow, now it is Bussels". Less politically integrated EFTA offering simialr economic benefits may be more attractive alternative.

Except the lack of influence, a EEC of West Germany, France, Benelux and Italy would have a little under 200 million inhabitant, the vast majority of Europes industry, and be the most important market for EFTA. They would simply be forced to follows EERC rules and standardlisations. The alternative was that EEC turned into a federal state, which was member of EFTA, while EFTA turned into EU in everything but name. So we would get a EU which was named EFTA and which was even more dominated by a French-German alliance.
 

Eurofed

Banned
Maybe if TTL EEC goes down EU road sooner and harder ex-communist (and in Balts case newly independant) may be reluctant to join it out of fear of loosing their newly gained sovereignity. "In the past it was Moscow, now it is Bussels". Less politically integrated EFTA offering simialr economic benefits may be more attractive alternative.

It is possible for Eastern European countries but not really likely, for the reasons I argued in #8 (prevailing economic and cultural ties with EU countries, attraction of EU economic subsidies and EU additional security guarantee) and that in all likelihood trump concerns about sovreignty like they have done IOTL, where such concerns have provenly been less influential in Eastern Europe than in Britain or Scandinavia.
 

Eurofed

Banned
Except the lack of influence, a EEC of West Germany, France, Benelux and Italy would have a little under 200 million inhabitant, the vast majority of Europes industry, and be the most important market for EFTA. They would simply be forced to follows EERC rules and standardlisations. The alternative was that EEC turned into a federal state, which was member of EFTA, while EFTA turned into EU in everything but name. So we would get a EU which was named EFTA and which was even more dominated by a French-German alliance.

Well, this is actually a quite high-probability ATL and FH development path for the EU. The Western European EU core federalizes, in all likelihood joined by Eastern European nations in sufficiently good shape to qualify for opportunistic reasons, nations that are unwilling or (yet) unable to go that far in integration join an EFTA-like structure that is an EEC/EU-lite (single market, no common currency, no political, security, and foreign policy integration, members may or may not have Schengen on a case-by-case basis), inner core and outer shell of the same polity in fact.
 
It is possible for Eastern European countries but not really likely, for the reasons I argued in #8 (prevailing economic and cultural ties with EU countries, attraction of EU economic subsidies and EU additional security guarantee) and that in all likelihood trump concerns about sovreignty like they have done IOTL, where such concerns have provenly been less influential in Eastern Europe than in Britain or Scandinavia.

Point, but we are talking about early/mid 1990s here, point when these countries become somewhat eligable to join either organization. In OTL they opted for EU because there really was no alternative, EFTA being second class, EU wannabes. In OTL EFTA didn't really take off and was missing big player, something not happening in TTL.

OK, granted, EEC would be better off than EFTA but I don't think E Europe would automatically drift in their direction. I'd say it would depend on how EFTA/EEC relations develop, mostly how much economic barriers exist between them.
 

Eurofed

Banned
Point, but we are talking about early/mid 1990s here, point when these countries become somewhat eligable to join either organization. In OTL they opted for EU because there really was no alternative, EFTA being second class, EU wannabes. In OTL EFTA didn't really take off and was missing big player, something not happening in TTL.

OK, granted, EEC would be better off than EFTA but I don't think E Europe would automatically drift in their direction. I'd say it would depend on how EFTA/EEC relations develop, mostly how much economic barriers exist between them.

Well, I acknowledge that it is not a sure thing, and EE may end up in the EFTA, especially if they are not yet in a fit socio-economic and political shape for EU membership, but most likely it is going to be a temporary phase in the end, since in the overwhelming majority of cases, EE is still going to have stronger economic and cultural/political ties with the EU no matter what, even if they go in the EFTA first.
 
Top