This paper traces the historical development of European unification ideas following World War II. Beginning with the 1951 Treaty of Paris and the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community, the paper examines key intellectual and political frameworks that shaped integration efforts, including David Mitrany's functionalism, Altiero Spinelli's federalism, Jean Monnet's functional-federalism, and Ernst Haas's neofunctionalism. It also considers the economic consequences of post-war reconstruction and the ongoing challenges facing Western Europe in achieving sustainable economic growth and political cohesion.
The paper demonstrates comparative theoretical analysis by presenting multiple frameworks for European integration and showing how each responds to the failures of the previous one. For example, Mitrany's functionalism is contrasted with Spinelli's federalism, and Monnet's hybrid approach is shown to synthesize elements of both. This comparative structure helps readers understand not just what each theory claims, but why it emerged and what problem it was designed to solve.
The paper follows a clear thematic-chronological structure: an introduction establishing the post-war context, a section on the Treaty of Paris as the first concrete institutional step, followed by four theoretical sections (Mitrany, Spinelli, Monnet, neofunctionalism) presented in roughly historical order, and a conclusion reflecting on Western Europe's ongoing economic and political challenges. Each body section is self-contained while contributing to the overarching narrative of European integration.
Europe was torn apart by ugly forms of national and ethnic hatred in the aftermath of World War II (1939–1945). Geographically situated at the center of a global power system, Europe recognized that any failure of peace could lead to global annihilation. In response, Europeans worked to establish a framework that would foster peace and regional cooperation. Their goal was the creation of a Common Market, which was ultimately established by 1957. This essay highlights the historical development of unification ideas in Europe after World War II, examining the key treaties, movements, and theoretical frameworks that shaped the continent's path toward integration.
Europe suffered both economic and political crises after World War II. In 1950, Robert Schuman, the French Foreign Minister, proposed placing the production of German coal and steel under a common High Authority, inviting all European countries to participate within an organizational framework. The Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, France, and Germany accepted this challenge and began negotiating a treaty. The foundational idea was inspired by Jean Monnet, a senior French civil servant who had put forward the original proposal in 1950. Although his idea was straightforward, the participating countries envisioned a more complex institutional structure.
The Treaty of Paris, establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), was signed on 18 April 1951 in Paris. It was valid for fifty years and expired on 23 July 2002. The Treaty opened on 10 February 1953 for iron ore, scrap, and coal, and on 1 May 1953 for steel. Its objective was to create a common market for coal and steel. As Surhone, Tennoe, and Henssonow (2010) noted, "The treaty was seen as producing diplomatic and economic stability in Western Europe after the Second World War" (p. 60). It was expected to bring economic expansion, increase employment, raise living standards, improve working conditions, equalize access to sources of production, and establish the lowest possible prices.
The Treaty enabled the free movement of these products without taxes or customs duties and included two important protocols. Its overall achievements were highly positive: the Community managed various crises, ensured balanced production development, and improved the distribution of resources. Steel production increased, becoming both better and cheaper. The Treaty expired in 2002 and was subsequently amended by several other agreements, including the Merger Treaty and the Treaty on Greenland.
David Mitrany (1888–1974) spent most of his adult life in the United States and Britain, having been born in Romania. He had no particular interest in becoming a theorist of European integration. In his view, nationalism was the root cause of war, and he believed that nations needed to be tied more closely together to prevent the catastrophe of another world war. Mitrany was not in favor of federation as a means of binding nations together, and he also opposed the creation of regional federations, arguing that such arrangements simply reproduced national rivalries on a larger scale.
Instead, Mitrany proposed the creation of a series of separate international functional agencies, each with authority over a specific area of human life. His ultimate goal was to remove authority over individual technical tasks from national governments. He argued that if states continued to surrender areas of control, they would gradually become less capable of independent action. He was confident that national governments would eventually discover they were "enmeshed in the spreading web of international activities and agencies" (Mitrany, 1966, p. 35). He used the organization of railway systems and other communications networks as examples, and he also promoted less nationalistic outlooks and attitudes among the general public.
To devise a guarantee of peace after World War II, various Resistance movements were formed across Europe. In December 1944, the European Union of Federalists (EUF) was established and was especially strong in Italy, where Altiero Spinelli was a leading figure. As Milward (1984) observed, "The wave of hope for a better world and a changed future for the human race had swept across Europe" (p. 55). Federalism appealed to Resistance groups because it proposed superseding nationalism entirely.
It is important to clarify that in Italy and France, World War II was perceived as an ideological war, while in Russia and Britain it was experienced as a nationalist war. Spinelli and Ernesto Rossi produced the Ventotene Manifesto in 1941, calling for a "European Federation." The Manifesto was adopted by the EUF, which began agitating for an international conference and sought to exploit the disruption the war had caused to existing political structures, aiming to break from the order of older nation-states. Over time, many federalists shifted toward a gradualist approach, which was successfully embodied in the ECSC. Meanwhile, intergovernmental organizations had emerged from various congresses, and some national political systems had re-established themselves.
World War II completely destroyed the economic and political conditions of Europe, and Europeans continue to face significant hurdles. When we look at Western Europe today, we see policies of continued fiscal contraction aimed at meeting abstract requirements for future monetary union. These policies seem, at least from an outside perspective, to miss the point entirely. They do not provide firms or workers with stronger incentives to create and find jobs, either through government subsidy or through market opportunity. Since moving decisively in either ideological direction appears unacceptably risky, European governments have chosen to remain in the middle, hoping that monetary union will produce positive results. Western European economic management continues to puzzle those who study and practice macroeconomic policy elsewhere in the world.
You’re 63% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.