Norway And The European Union Article Index for
Norway
Limousines in
Norway
Website Links For
Norway
 

Information About

Norway And The European Union




One of the most important and divisive issues in Norwegian political and economic debate since World War II has been the country's relationship with the European Union .


CHRONOLOGY

In the early 1960's, Norway applied for membership in the Treaty Of Rome when the United Kingdom asked to join. When France rebuffed the UK's application, Norway withdrew.

Norway completed its negotiations for the terms to govern a Norwegian membership in the European Community on January 22 1972 . Following an overwhelming majority in favor of joining the ED in early 1972, the government decided to put the question to a popular Referendum , scheduled for September 24 and 25. The result was that 53.5% voted against membership and 46.5% for it. The Norwegian Labour Party government led by Trygve Bratteli resigned over the outcome of the referendum, and a coalition government led by Lars Korvald took over.

Norway entered into a trade agreement with the community following the outcome of the referendum that remained in force until Norway joined the European Economic Area in 1994.

On November 28 , 1994 , yet another referendum was held, narrowing the margin but yielding the same result: 52.2% opposed membership and 47.8% in favor. There are currently no plans to file another application.


PROMINENT ISSUES

Membership in the European Union was possibly the most controversial and polarizing issue in Norwegian politics since its independence in 1905. Both sides of the issue started advocacy organizations that persist to this day, and even within political parties there were divisions. Although the debate took on many forms, some of the most prevalent arguments on either side could be summarized


Against membership

  • A surrender of political sovereignty - Norway would have to amend its constitution to become a full member of the EU, ceding political power to the European parliament and commission.

  • Reduction in economic self-determination - being subject to the economic policy of the EU would compromise Norway's ability to determine its own economic development, particularly with respect to rural needs and natural resources

  • Threat to self-sufficiency - increasing Norway's exposure to competition from other EU countries would reduce the country's self-sufficiency in food and other essential commodities

  • Threat to cultural identity - the distinctly Norwegian culture would be overcome by commercial interests

  • An additional layer of government and bureaucracy - the European Union's administrative apparatus would add cost and inconvenience to an already well-developed Norwegian government



In favor of membership

  • International cooperation to preserve peace - for several millennia, European powers have been at war with each other. By increasing interdependence among European powers, war is an increasingly unappealing option

  • Influence over decisions that affect Norway anyway - the Norwegian economy is completely dependent on the EU anyway, and it would be better to be in a position of some power

  • Participation in an emerging political bloc - the EU is emerging as a counterbalance to the United States in foreign affairs



CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CONTROVERSY

Because these positions to a great extent cut across ideological boundaries, various political parties have dealt with the issue in different ways. The Centre Party has maintained the most principled stand against membership, and though parties such as the Conservative Party and the Labour Party support membership in their platform, they allow for a minority to oppose it. Most dramatically, the Liberal Party split over the issue in 1972 at the famed party conference in Røros and did not reunite until 1989.

Disagreements on this issue have been known to create divisiveness within families and local communities. Although there is a general pattern that urban communities favor membership and rural communities don't, there have been vocal minorities in every area of Norway.

Complicating the matter has been that a great variety of political and emotional factors have been raised in the debate. Radical socialists oppose membership because of an opposition to conservative economic and political forces that concern them within Europe; opponents on the right are concerned about an infringement on Norwegian culture; and others are opposed in principle to compromising Norwegian sovereignty. Some moderate socialists see membership as a way to participate in the global social democratic movement, whereas libertarians favor open markets for capital, services, and goods.

Many observers felt that the Centre Party misread the situation when they interpreted the narrow majority against membership in 1994 as an endorsement of the party's general platform. Party politics continue to be confounded by this issue, and most governments tend to avoid it.