Introduction
The majority of Western European countries joined the EU under conditions of democratic evolution and the existence of long-standing multilateral relations in various fields with their neighbors in the region, which is why the Spanish case is special. Its accession to the European Union, which occurred on 1 January 1986 in the phase of consolidation of democracy, was a momentous event in the history of this country (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 18). Isolated for centuries from Europe in many aspects, Spain has become part of the community of Western democracies, an active participant in European integration and the international division of labor. It also changed its place in the world and ended its social and political isolation. Therefore, it is essential to establish the reasons for EU accession and to characterize the political process.
The Spanish Society Debate
It is essential to mention that Spain’s historical relations with Europe have been framed in various forms. During its golden age in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Spanish Empire, with its numerous colonies, sought European hegemony and acted as a defender of European unity (Pierson, 2019). However, the collapse of power and the loss of overseas possessions stimulated the tendency toward isolationism, which also asked for the geopolitical isolation of this mountainous country on land from the more developed nations of the continent. Nevertheless, isolationism has completely never prevailed due to the same geopolitical specificity.
This is because Spain is located at the crossroads of different cultures in Europe, the Mediterranean, Latin America, and North Africa. The Spanish political culture was heterogeneous and atomic, with a mixture of opposing values and attitudes, including isolation from Europe and attraction to it. Until the 1970s, the question of belonging to Europe was a constant source of heated debate in public opinion (Pierson, 2019, p. 34). Primarily among intellectuals in times of national crises and catastrophes, the country was faced with the dilemma of finding its own original way or following the European course of progress in politics and culture.
Moreover, Spanish society at that time had two widespread opinions about the future of Spain. There was the isolationist view that integration with the West was fraught with the loss of many attractive features of the national character. For instance, a negative attitude toward wealth, asceticism, the capacity for self-sacrifice, and a sense of collectivism (Pierson, 2019). Nonetheless, Europeanists considered that many of these traits were a product of Spain’s cultural backwardness and that integration with the West would produce new, appealing qualities of the national character.
It should be emphasized that during the years of the Franco dictatorship, the domestic and foreign policy priorities of the authorities successively replaced each other. By the end of the 1950s, Francoism was implementing a policy of autarchy, such as the creation of an isolated, closed state that did not participate in the international division of labor (Pierson, 2019). Meanwhile, militant nationalism and xenophobia were cultivated in society. However, the acute financial and monetary crisis that occurred in the second half of the 1950s, accompanied by inflation and state budget deficits, signaled the need for a change in policy. Therefore, against the background of the economic success of many Western European countries that signed the Treaty of Rome in 1957, it clearly revealed the inefficiency of the economic mechanism of Spain, isolated from Europe (Pierson, 2019). Moreover, one of the most significant results of the policy of autarky was a distorted financial relationship and a distorted system of fundamental values.
Consequently, the issue of in-depth economic reform, capable of reducing state intervention in the economy, restoring the role of deformed commodity-money relations, and attracting foreign capital, was on the agenda. It was a dramatic moment in the political history of Francoism when the question of the socio-economic development model was decided (Pierson, 2019). That is the transition to an open economy, inseparable from the development of connections with the international community and the common market or the continuation of the policy of autarchy. Nevertheless, during a fierce struggle between supporters of modernization and the Falangists, the former won. In this way, a more transparent economy was set in motion.
The New Spanish Course
It is essential to mention that the change in Spain’s political and economic course was proceeding quickly. The 1960s and 1970s were the time of the “Spanish economic miracle,” when the advantages of the transition to an open economy became clearly apparent (Brydan, 2019, p. 81). Mass labor migration to Western European countries and even more mass foreign tourism expanded all connections with the outside world. Moreover, immigration and the reception of tourists made it possible to compare various ideas and forms of life (Brydan, 2019). It is important to note that there was also a critical reconsideration of centuries of animosity toward foreigners and perceptions of Spain’s superiority over other countries.
Although the country had not yet freed itself from the oppression of the authoritarian regime, there had been a genuine spiritual revolution and a radical change in the system of values. In addition, the configurations of the 1960s and 1970s are often viewed as, perhaps, more significant for the country over several centuries (Brydan, 2019). Therefore, through the counter-flow of foreigners, emigrants, and tourists into and out of Spain, Spaniards learned for the first time in their history to consider their faults and virtues as commodities. Thus, only a few years ago, the Spanish were unaware of the laws of political economy. As with most Third World peoples, they used to view the utilitarianism of developed societies with a mixture of envy and contempt (Brydan, 2019). The Spanish were exposed to the values of more progressive societies through tourism and emigration. This prolonged overdue psychological upheaval, which neither the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century nor the nineteenth-century industrial revolution could produce in Spain, tourism accomplished in a short time, without violence or bloodshed (Brydan, 2019). It is essential to remark that the Spanish have made a European choice.
Europe became considered a standard of freedom and progress, a model to be followed. The public’s attitudes were fully consistent with the orientations of most political organizations in Spain (Brydan, 2019). As early as the 1960s, one of the main reasons for rallying the opposition forces was the idea of joining the EU, which was associated with eliminating the dictatorship and the transition to democracy. The pro-European sentiment of the opposition was reinforced by the fact that the negotiations conducted by the Franco regime with representatives of the EU in 1962-1966 about admission to Spain were unsuccessful (Brydan, 2019, p. 96). This was because Western European governments, considering the anti-Franco sentiments of their public, refused to accept broad cooperation with that country.
The idea of joining the EU became even more vigorously promoted during the post-Franco phase. It was perceived by leading political forces as an imperative of economic development, necessary to overcome the financial crisis, modernize the economy and strengthen the country’s foreign policy positions. Moreover, the importance of accession to the EU was also justified by the need to enhance domestic political stability and consolidate the young Spanish democracy (Brydan, 2019). Furthermore, the admission of Western democracies into society became a guarantee against an ultra-right revolution, the danger of which appeared to many progressively-minded Spanish people to be extremely dangerous. The attitude of the country’s leading politicians toward the EU was influenced by the nature of “Spanish-style” democratization (Brydan, 2019, p. 103). Francism was eliminated not through military defeat or suppression, but through reforms from above, without the radical destruction and purging of the old state system.
It is also important to note the key politicians of the time who had considerable influence in Spain. Therefore, the leading politicians in the transition phase were King Juan Carlos, appointed by Franco, and President Suárez, who held several public offices during the dictatorship. This implies that the continuity with Francoism made it difficult for political parties to legitimize the new regime. Consequently, it was not possible to claim that the new government was fundamentally distinct from the previous one. In this context, the accession to the EU acquired a symbolic meaning, signaling a separation from the authoritarian Frankist regime. In other words, this step became a sign of the legitimization of Spanish democracy.
All the leading parties in Spain were in favor of accession to the EU. This is the ruling center-right Democratic Center Union, the right-wing People’s Union, the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party, and the Communist Party (Brydan, 2019). In addition, this demand was also supported by the trade unions, the Trade Union Confederation of Workers’ Commissions, affiliated with the Communist Party. When considering the whole range of political organizations in Spain, it should be mentioned that only the neo-Francoists and the leftist groups were against the country’s accession to the EU (Brydan, 2019). Spain’s European choice of expanding political pluralism, reducing the importance of the state’s role in the economy, and limiting the country’s foreign policy independence, contradicted the models of public order that it advocated.
Therefore, the major political forces in Spain have reached a consensus on the question of accession to the EU. In this aspect, the Spanish situation contrasted with that of the other Southern European countries, Portugal and Greece, where authoritarian regimes had also been dismantled. In these two countries, such a consensus did not emerge during the transition phase (Brydan, 2019). This is due to the position of some leftist forces, especially the Communist parties, which held an orthodox line and strongly opposed joining the EU. Hence, the European choice became a subject of internal political struggle in these states.
Accession to the EU
It is essential to consider the stages of Spain’s accession to the European Union. The first stage of examination occurred in the years 1976-77 (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 61). Then negotiations began between the EU and the new Spanish Government on the Kingdom’s “European” prospects. The Spanish Government received approval from the EU to apply. The second phase followed that roughly attributed to the years 1977-82 (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 85). It was at this time that Spain formally used to join the Community.
During that same period, a new Constitution of the Kingdom was adopted, and the mechanism for implementing international legal standards was updated. Moreover, the third stage was in 1982-1985, when negotiations were held between the Spanish Government and the leaders of the Community, and the European Institutions on the conditions for Spain’s accession to the EU (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 97). Therefore the Spanish Government succeeded in convincing Brussels to grant a six-year transitional period for industrial products, a seven-year period for agricultural products, and ten years for vegetables. In addition, during this period, Spain began harmonizing its legislation with EU requirements and adapting Community regulations.
Finally, the fourth stage of Spain’s integration into the European Union should be highlighted. From a chronological perspective, it should be mentioned that in 1985 the negotiations for Spain’s accession to the EU were concluded, and the required documents were signed. Moreover, on May 8, 1985, the European Parliament adopted a special resolution approving the signing of the “Treaty of Accession to the European Union in Spain” (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 103). It is also important to note that, in the EU institutions, Spain received eight votes in the EU Council, two European Commissioner posts, 60 of the 518 mandates of the European Parliament, and one post of 13 in the EU Court of Justice. Considering that in 1985 Spain’s share of the total GDP of all member countries was only 6.5%, the average representation in EU structures of 11% can be regarded as a significant diplomatic victory (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 100). In this way, Spain became a full member of the European Union and began developing its foreign and domestic policy per European values.
Conclusion
Therefore, accession to the EU has increased Spain’s international importance and its role in Europe and the world. In deciding between the European and Atlanticist components of its own foreign policy, Spain favors the former. Therefore, the course adopted by society was the basis of the country’s domestic and foreign policy. The policy of European integration and Spain’s participation in the EU has helped the state to cope with significant challenges that have existed for a long time.
References
Brydan, D. (2019). Franco’s internationalists: Social experts and Spain’s search for legitimacy. Oxford University Press.
Flynn, D. O., & Giráldez, A. (2017). European entry into the Pacific: Spain and the Acapulco-Manila Galleons. Routledge.
Pierson, P. (2019). The history of Spain. ABC-CLIO.