What do you think?
Rate this book
Winston Churchill, vader van Europa
Na de Tweede Wereldoorlog wist Winston Churchill één ding Europese eenwording zou de enige manier zijn om een vredig en veilig Europa te creëren. Nadat hij in juli 1945 de verkiezingen meedogenloos verloor, reisde Churchill het continent rond met zijn pleidooi over de noodzaak van een 'Verenigde Staten van Europa'.
Churchill lanceerde zijn Europese campagne tijdens zijn bezoek aan Zwitserland in september 1946. In 1947 stichtte hij de 'United Europe Movement', een invloedrijke Britse beweging die als doel had het idee van een verenigd Europa te populariseren. Onder druk van Churchill en zijn Europese Beweging werd in 1949 de allereerste politieke Europese institutie de Raad van Europa.
In het eerste boek ooit geschreven over Churchill en Europa, gebruikt de jonge Oxford-historicus Felix Klos een schat aan niet eerder gepubliceerd materiaal om het fascinerende verhaal te vertellen van Churchills beslissende rol in de naoorlogse Europese eenwording. We volgen de Grand Old Man door de tuinen van Zwitserland, de gangen van Westminster, de paleizen van Den Haag, en de rokerige achterkamers van Straatsburg. We zien hem, duwend, trekkend, provocerend en overtuigend het politieke handwerk doen in dienst van wat hij hoopte dat zijn belangrijkste bijdrage aan de wereld zou een permanente Pax Europaea.
Dit uiterst actuele boek is onmisbaar voor wie geïnteresseerd is in Churchill, de Europese Unie en de rol van Groot Brittannië in het Europese project. Keren de Britten in het komende referendum na zeventig jaar de Europese nalatenschap van de 'Greatest Briton' de rug toe?
Churchill lanceerde zijn Europese campagne tijdens zijn bezoek aan Zwitserland in september 1946. In 1947 stichtte hij de 'United Europe Movement', een invloedrijke Britse beweging die als doel had het idee van een verenigd Europa te populariseren. Onder druk van Churchill en zijn Europese Beweging werd in 1949 de allereerste politieke Europese institutie de Raad van Europa.
In het eerste boek ooit geschreven over Churchill en Europa, gebruikt de jonge Oxford-historicus Felix Klos een schat aan niet eerder gepubliceerd materiaal om het fascinerende verhaal te vertellen van Churchills beslissende rol in de naoorlogse Europese eenwording. We volgen de Grand Old Man door de tuinen van Zwitserland, de gangen van Westminster, de paleizen van Den Haag, en de rokerige achterkamers van Straatsburg. We zien hem, duwend, trekkend, provocerend en overtuigend het politieke handwerk doen in dienst van wat hij hoopte dat zijn belangrijkste bijdrage aan de wereld zou een permanente Pax Europaea.
Dit uiterst actuele boek is onmisbaar voor wie geïnteresseerd is in Churchill, de Europese Unie en de rol van Groot Brittannië in het Europese project. Keren de Britten in het komende referendum na zeventig jaar de Europese nalatenschap van de 'Greatest Briton' de rug toe?
364 pages, Kindle Edition
Published June 15, 2016
5 people are currently reading
71 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
December 29, 2022
Churchill was absoluut een leider met een brede visie gericht naar de toekomt, zijn ambitie en doorzettingsvermogen hebben bijgedragen tot een eenheid in Europa, ook als is de plaats van Groot Brittannië niet degene die hij in gedachten had.
Het boek geeft een goed inzicht aan de stappen die werden voorafgegaan aan wat nu de Europese Gemeenschap is.
Het boek geeft een goed inzicht aan de stappen die werden voorafgegaan aan wat nu de Europese Gemeenschap is.
February 27, 2020
Must read in tijden van Brexit. Een mooi overzicht van de totstandkoming van de Raad van Europa en de Europese eenmaking onder leiding van Churchill. Het toont aan de andere kant ook perfect de problemen aan die tot Brexit hebben geleid, al was dat niet de bedoeling van het boek.
May 12, 2020
''We hope to see a Europe where men of every country will think as much of being a European as of belonging to their native land, and that without losing any of their love and loyalty of their birthplace. We hope wherever they go in this wide domain, to which we set no limits in the European Continent, they will truly feel "Here I am at home. I am a citizen of this country too". (Winston Churchill, Amsterdam, 9 May 1948)
This book is a powerful reminder that the project of European unity is so much more than an agreement on economic cooperation. Today, in 2017, the European Union is often seen as a burdensome regulator and an obstacle to national freedoms. At the same time, it is often used, by national politicians from all backgrounds, as a scapegoat for everything that goes wrong in their country.
This book reminds us that the European Union has a higher purpose: Peace. Seven decades without major war on European soil almost make it hard today to imagine the urgency that European unity had to guarantee peace in the first years after the second world war.
Felix Klos describes Winston Churchill's important role in the search for European unity. I didn't know that Churchill was such an enthusiastic and important promoter of European unity before, during and immediately after the second world war, so this book contained a lot of new information for me.
As early as 1930, Churchill made public his favourable views on European unity, stating that European solidarity is the best guarantee against the outbreak of mayor wars and expressing hope that we can see ourselves both as Frenchmen, German, Spaniard or Dutchmen and as Europeans.
In Churchill's view, European unity not only guarantees peace, but it also serves to protect freedom and to promote democracy: In a speech in 1947, he suggests that only liberal democracies that pledge to protect individual freedoms of their citizen should be allowed to participate in the project of European unity.
The book covers several decades, from the 1920 to the 1960, of Churchill's ideas and his actions to promote European unity. Whereas around 1930 he saw European unity as a tool to prevent war in general and to facilitate economic prosperity, during the second half of WW II he came to see a united Europe as vital for making sure the Soviet Union would not start a new war in Europe.
Only 2 months after WW II ended, Churchill was voted out off office. He would be re-elected as prime minister in 1951. In the intervening years, Churchill remained leader of the conservative party and devoted himself to the European project. Speeches were his method of choice to influence public opinion, and in the book several of his most important speeches on Europe are used as markers of time and events.
The book opens with perhaps one of Churchill's most important speeches on Europe, which he gave in Zurich in September 1946. In this speech, he proposes the creation of the United States of Europe. This in itself was already a bold move in a divided Europe so soon after the war. Even more audacious was his suggestion that Germany should be part of this project. Obviously animosity against Germany just one year after WW II was widespread. With his desire to include the Germans, Churchill showed both boldness and vision.
In most of his other speeches on Europe in these years, such as at the first session of his United Europe Movement in Great Britain in May 1947, during the international congress on Europe in May 1948 in The Hague and Amsterdam and for the first European assembly in Strasbourg in August 1949, his focus was on explaining his vision for the future of a united Europe and on inspiring politicians and the general public. He preferred to leave mostly to others the details on what a united Europe should look like, what the organisational and institutional structures should be. His focus on vision played to his oratory strengths, is aversion to details initially had the advantage of leaving many options open, but later seemed to result in a lack of commitment, especially when the plans proposed were not his own.
His visions and ideas are powerful. Most importantly, of course, is the idea that solidarity and cooperation help to preserve peace. Throughout the book, Churchill's vision covers many areas, from seeing the threat of the Soviet Union in the latter phase of WW II to envisioning a Europe without tariffs and with a single currency as early as 1946. Many of his ideas are obvious now, but must have been groundbreaking when he talked about them in the 1940s.
Many of the issues that are still debated nowadays were already present in the late 1940s. Most importantly: Are countries willing to transfer national sovereignty to a supranational institution? It became clear that countries on the continent were willing to go further in this than Great Britain. While Churchill was in the opposition and promoting European unity, the labour government lead by Clement Attlee preferred not to get too involved with Churchill's project for European unity. Once Churchill became prime minister again in 1951, it was his minister of foreign affairs, Anthony Eden, who opposed the idea of relinquishing sovereignty in order to join the first real step towards European unity, the European coal and steel community (ECSC).
This was linked to another debate that continues to be relevant today: What role should Great Britain play in the European project? Churchill's views on this changed during his life: In 1930, he envisioned Great Britain as a good and helpful neighbour (''We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed''), in the 1940s he was willing to consider Great Britain as a member with special privileges of an organically growing union (but not as a member of a federal structure) and in the 1960s, just before his death, he approved membership of the EEC, writing ''I think that the Government are right to apply to join the European Economic Community."
The great paradox of Churchill is that he promoted European unity while he was leader of the opposition in the late 1940s, and then didn't really make a real dedicated effort to join the new initiatives for European unity when he was prime minister in the early 1950's. The most important of these initiatives was European coal and steel community, basically the implementation of the Schuman plan, proposed by the French minister of foreign affairs Robert Schuman and promoted by Jean Monnet.
There are several reasons for this paradox, the most important being the question of handing over sovereignty to a supranational institution. ECSC had a federal structure with a central authority, very different from Churchill's ideas about a gradual, organically growing union. Churchill seemed unwilling to commit to plans that where not his own, especially if they involved a federalists approach to European unity. Another reason is that power inside his government had shifted towards Anthony Eden, who was not in favour of membership of the ECSC and handing over sovereignty. Reluctance to join the ECSC also had to do with Great Britain's image of itself: It saw itself as a major world power, operating in several spheres of interest and with several special relationships (with the United States, with its dominions such as Canada and Australia and with the Common Wealth). Whether this self image as a world power was realistic in the late 1940s, is questionable (just 10 years later, with European economies outperforming Great Britain's, with many of the British colonies aiming for independence, with the US in favour of decolonisation, Great Britain started to apply for membership of the European Economic Community (EEC), first opposed by French president Charles de Gaulle, later finally granted in 1973).
This book is an interesting read, however, there is room for improvement. First, I felt the book risks being a hagiography. There is little criticism of Churchill and his ideas. Opposing ideas, especially from the Labour government, are depicted as narrow-minded. Similarly, opposing ideas that propose a more federal approach to the structure of European unity are invariable described as ''radical federalism''. Why does the author apply the label ''radical'' to the early ideas about a European federation?
Second, the book is above all a chronicle of Churchill's ideas and actions for European unity. The focus on Churchill sometimes stands in the way of more general analysis of the European project.
Third, I thought that in the second half of the book too much attention was paid to the efforts to create a European defence force. In the end, this didn't materialize. Although Churchill had a keen interest in this subject, he often wasn't directly involved himself. The discussion of a European defence force is largely based on the diaries of Harold MacMillan, for me an indication that less time could have been spend on this subject.
This book is a powerful reminder that the project of European unity is so much more than an agreement on economic cooperation. Today, in 2017, the European Union is often seen as a burdensome regulator and an obstacle to national freedoms. At the same time, it is often used, by national politicians from all backgrounds, as a scapegoat for everything that goes wrong in their country.
This book reminds us that the European Union has a higher purpose: Peace. Seven decades without major war on European soil almost make it hard today to imagine the urgency that European unity had to guarantee peace in the first years after the second world war.
Felix Klos describes Winston Churchill's important role in the search for European unity. I didn't know that Churchill was such an enthusiastic and important promoter of European unity before, during and immediately after the second world war, so this book contained a lot of new information for me.
As early as 1930, Churchill made public his favourable views on European unity, stating that European solidarity is the best guarantee against the outbreak of mayor wars and expressing hope that we can see ourselves both as Frenchmen, German, Spaniard or Dutchmen and as Europeans.
In Churchill's view, European unity not only guarantees peace, but it also serves to protect freedom and to promote democracy: In a speech in 1947, he suggests that only liberal democracies that pledge to protect individual freedoms of their citizen should be allowed to participate in the project of European unity.
The book covers several decades, from the 1920 to the 1960, of Churchill's ideas and his actions to promote European unity. Whereas around 1930 he saw European unity as a tool to prevent war in general and to facilitate economic prosperity, during the second half of WW II he came to see a united Europe as vital for making sure the Soviet Union would not start a new war in Europe.
Only 2 months after WW II ended, Churchill was voted out off office. He would be re-elected as prime minister in 1951. In the intervening years, Churchill remained leader of the conservative party and devoted himself to the European project. Speeches were his method of choice to influence public opinion, and in the book several of his most important speeches on Europe are used as markers of time and events.
The book opens with perhaps one of Churchill's most important speeches on Europe, which he gave in Zurich in September 1946. In this speech, he proposes the creation of the United States of Europe. This in itself was already a bold move in a divided Europe so soon after the war. Even more audacious was his suggestion that Germany should be part of this project. Obviously animosity against Germany just one year after WW II was widespread. With his desire to include the Germans, Churchill showed both boldness and vision.
In most of his other speeches on Europe in these years, such as at the first session of his United Europe Movement in Great Britain in May 1947, during the international congress on Europe in May 1948 in The Hague and Amsterdam and for the first European assembly in Strasbourg in August 1949, his focus was on explaining his vision for the future of a united Europe and on inspiring politicians and the general public. He preferred to leave mostly to others the details on what a united Europe should look like, what the organisational and institutional structures should be. His focus on vision played to his oratory strengths, is aversion to details initially had the advantage of leaving many options open, but later seemed to result in a lack of commitment, especially when the plans proposed were not his own.
His visions and ideas are powerful. Most importantly, of course, is the idea that solidarity and cooperation help to preserve peace. Throughout the book, Churchill's vision covers many areas, from seeing the threat of the Soviet Union in the latter phase of WW II to envisioning a Europe without tariffs and with a single currency as early as 1946. Many of his ideas are obvious now, but must have been groundbreaking when he talked about them in the 1940s.
Many of the issues that are still debated nowadays were already present in the late 1940s. Most importantly: Are countries willing to transfer national sovereignty to a supranational institution? It became clear that countries on the continent were willing to go further in this than Great Britain. While Churchill was in the opposition and promoting European unity, the labour government lead by Clement Attlee preferred not to get too involved with Churchill's project for European unity. Once Churchill became prime minister again in 1951, it was his minister of foreign affairs, Anthony Eden, who opposed the idea of relinquishing sovereignty in order to join the first real step towards European unity, the European coal and steel community (ECSC).
This was linked to another debate that continues to be relevant today: What role should Great Britain play in the European project? Churchill's views on this changed during his life: In 1930, he envisioned Great Britain as a good and helpful neighbour (''We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed''), in the 1940s he was willing to consider Great Britain as a member with special privileges of an organically growing union (but not as a member of a federal structure) and in the 1960s, just before his death, he approved membership of the EEC, writing ''I think that the Government are right to apply to join the European Economic Community."
The great paradox of Churchill is that he promoted European unity while he was leader of the opposition in the late 1940s, and then didn't really make a real dedicated effort to join the new initiatives for European unity when he was prime minister in the early 1950's. The most important of these initiatives was European coal and steel community, basically the implementation of the Schuman plan, proposed by the French minister of foreign affairs Robert Schuman and promoted by Jean Monnet.
There are several reasons for this paradox, the most important being the question of handing over sovereignty to a supranational institution. ECSC had a federal structure with a central authority, very different from Churchill's ideas about a gradual, organically growing union. Churchill seemed unwilling to commit to plans that where not his own, especially if they involved a federalists approach to European unity. Another reason is that power inside his government had shifted towards Anthony Eden, who was not in favour of membership of the ECSC and handing over sovereignty. Reluctance to join the ECSC also had to do with Great Britain's image of itself: It saw itself as a major world power, operating in several spheres of interest and with several special relationships (with the United States, with its dominions such as Canada and Australia and with the Common Wealth). Whether this self image as a world power was realistic in the late 1940s, is questionable (just 10 years later, with European economies outperforming Great Britain's, with many of the British colonies aiming for independence, with the US in favour of decolonisation, Great Britain started to apply for membership of the European Economic Community (EEC), first opposed by French president Charles de Gaulle, later finally granted in 1973).
This book is an interesting read, however, there is room for improvement. First, I felt the book risks being a hagiography. There is little criticism of Churchill and his ideas. Opposing ideas, especially from the Labour government, are depicted as narrow-minded. Similarly, opposing ideas that propose a more federal approach to the structure of European unity are invariable described as ''radical federalism''. Why does the author apply the label ''radical'' to the early ideas about a European federation?
Second, the book is above all a chronicle of Churchill's ideas and actions for European unity. The focus on Churchill sometimes stands in the way of more general analysis of the European project.
Third, I thought that in the second half of the book too much attention was paid to the efforts to create a European defence force. In the end, this didn't materialize. Although Churchill had a keen interest in this subject, he often wasn't directly involved himself. The discussion of a European defence force is largely based on the diaries of Harold MacMillan, for me an indication that less time could have been spend on this subject.
February 11, 2018
Bedankt, Winston Churchill! Bedankt, Felix Klos!
December 30, 2019
DNF @41%
Vervelende hagiografie. Misschien een aardig boek voor iemand die echt alles wat over Churchill geschreven is tot zich wil nemen.
Vervelende hagiografie. Misschien een aardig boek voor iemand die echt alles wat over Churchill geschreven is tot zich wil nemen.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews