Two significant integration projects were proposed (and negotiated) in the 1950s, but

they never came into effect. Identify these projects and give the historical context of
their proposal and ultimate failure. Provide at least one, preferably two possible
theoretical or conceptual explanations. 

1. History
In the 1950s, the European Union have attempted to constitute two projects that
eventually were not carried out. They are the plans to form a European Defense
Community and a European political Community.
After the outbreak of the Korean War, the United States proposed a rearmament
in West Germany and France was opposed to the idea and instead, they proposed that
there should be a European army that included West Germany. The United Kingdom
was not opposed to the idea but unwilling to join. Yet, this initiative was still
welcomed by the six founding members and the negotiation started in 1951 for a
European Defense Community. This was referred to the Pleven plan. The European
Defense Community would be composed of a Joint Defense Commission and a
Council of Ministers and the progress was so fast that the European Defense
Community Treaty was signed the next year, in 1952. The six founding member states
then found that political integration would be necessary as a next step, since the
European Defense Community would be commenced under effective political control
by the member states. Thus, the six founding member states proposed to the European
Coal and Steel Community that they should also establish a European political body
with authority. In 1953, a draft for a European Political Community was written and,
in the draft, it proposed that the European Defense Community should be merged
within a new framework.
Soon after, one council of ministers and one European Court were planned to
replace the corresponding institutions created under the European Coal and Steal
Community and the European Defense Community treaties. Even though it was
seemingly successful up to this point, there was still the draft treaty for economic
integration that was left unfinished as the founding members had only started limited
economic integration. At this point, they signed a treaty to merge their defense and
was ready to create a political community.
However, with the lack of the economic integration attempt and the vivid
memories of the War, the strong belief of “big is beautiful” was not reflected in the
economic sphere and the Soviet Union was acting as if a powerful economy on heavy
industry. The fear that economically rising Germany would seek revenge for its loss
of the war was obvious. The European Defense Community was later called for a stop
by the French themselves as a result of a proposed revision that was not supported by
the rest of the founding member states. The French refused to go along with the
original version with the reasons that it feared Germany would rearm, the lost French
control of military forces and that the end of Korean War and the death of Stalin (in
1953) made European Defense Community less of an urgent matter now.
The United Kingdom then initiated a few agreements and made a few attempts in
order to resolve such issues. West Germany was later accepted as a new member and
the agreements signed acted as a signal of the termination of the occupation of West
Germany. The European Defense Community was then unnecessary and thus
abandoned. As a result, the seemingly unratified European Defense Community
became the reason why the European Political Community project was left unfinished
and failed in 1954, due to the French national assembly.
After the unsuccessful project of European Defense Community and thus that of
European Political Community, the members states in Benelux proposed a different
idea. They believed that political unity was not an approach, but the final objective
and that the more immediate feasible objective was economic integration. These
countries worked closely economically, and political integration then came
subsequently. Eventually, they proposed the creation of a European Economic
Community. In 1955, the six founding member states approved the project altogether
and worked towards the establishment of a common market. That is to say, by
replacing European Defense Community with European Economic Community, the
focus switched from defense and politics to economy.
Since the failure of the European Defense Community, some might say that the
question of the assumption of a military coordination in the European Community
was left undiscussed until the Treaty on European Union in 1991.

2. Theories
In the constitutionalization process, both European Defense Community and the
European Political Community were seen to be identified as the form of formal and
explicit constitutionalization, which is the attempt to create a Capital C constitution, a
written constitution, for Europe. This mechanism is closest to the ideal domestic
experience that implies a constitutional moment, a public constitutional debate and a
democratic participation in the drafting and ratification stage. A codified document
recognized as the legitimate basis of the European polity sets the rules. Such
documents bring about stability even though it takes time to negotiation and develop a
constitution. In sum, the mechanism of formal and explicit constitutionalization would
offer a positivized constitution that is final and irreversible.
Additionally, when looking at the projects of European Defense Community and
European Political Community, neoclassical realists believe that leaders might be
limited and constrained by international and domestic politics. As the Pleven plan was
motivated by the prevention of arms conflict and the refusal of the ratification was
due to the problem of military power, neoclassical realism was chose to attempt to
explain the failure of European Defense Community and European Political
Community. As neoclassical realism states, the balance of relative power that might
have been brought to in the ratified proposals of European Defense Community was
the problem for the French side. As France attempted to seek to limit the relative
power of Germany after the Pleven plan, they proposed the establishment of European
Defense Community so as to control other countries. The maximization of the relative
distributed power through the European Defense Community was expected on the
French side and they thought they would be able to receive relatively more power.
However, when a vote on the ratification took place, the French national assembly
found that the relative power distribution they would gain from the European Defense
Community would not necessarily be mostly favored to themselves. Considering the
zero-sum game in the power distribution for the neoclassical realism, the French
believed that more power was distributed to Germany and too much power was taken
away from France. Thus, the French foresaw that it might gain more power without
European Defense Community in the end. Consequently, the European Political
Community was abandoned in discussions too.
Nevertheless, neoclassical realism does not quite emphasize the effect of
European Defense Community and European Political Community being international
institutions and focuses mostly only on power distribution and zero-sum game. As
such, integration is not considered at all as the purpose of European Political
Community was.
On the other hand, liberal institutionalism holds that international cooperation
between states is a sustainable way for reducing conflicts and competition. This can
also be the explanation why the Pleven Plan was brought up in the first place. It was
believed that by including strong countries in European Defense Community, they all
had a common goal to retain peace after the war. There was multiple channels
allowing for interaction among the states and at first, the attempt to establish
European Defense Community could be seen to create an “integrated community to
promote regional security issues.
However, with liberal institutionalism, there is the problem that there were not
any mature supranational institutions at the time when European Defense Community
was about to be established. Thus, there was no position to offer information to
governmental representatives or influence the negotiation about European Defense
Community. Besides, liberal institutionalism attempts to maximize absolute gain
through cooperation and states are not in the center of focus about the advantages
achieved by other states in a cooperative setting. This does not quite explain why
French people refused to go along with the agreement with the other states as it feared
the loss of its powers would bring more disadvantages to itself. Even though liberal
institutionalism is able to explain the institutional influence, it is not possible to see
how domestic factors affected the process of the establishment process of European
Defense Community and European Political Community.