Networks and Actors in the British and French Foreign Ministries: Responses to the Idea of European Integration, 1919-1957.

本项目涉及1919年至1957年间制定英法外交政策的公务员（常任官员）所应用的知识框架，以及他们如何决定欧洲一体化的国际安全方式是否优于更传统的单一国家战略。对欧洲一体化历史的研究往往侧重于政府层面的政策；很少有人注意到外交部门内的政策是如何制定和执行的，当然也没有任何比较的方式。然而，常驻官员的核心政治和外交假设应该是我们理解英法两国外交部或其内部网络如何将欧洲视为维持其国际影响力的解决方案的内在因素。我们还将说明，包括外交官在内的公务员如何反映任命他们的人和培训他们的人的价值体系，尽管他们并不总是反映他们所服务的政府部长的优先事项。尽管英法两国加入欧共体的时间不同，但之所以被选中，是因为它们是拥有相似人口的民族国家，有着相似的帝国历史和世界角色，而且它们都是联合国安理会常任理事国，是北约和欧盟的主要成员国。然而，从历史上看，这两个国家对欧洲安全和一体化的概念有着不同的看法，英国比法国更强调海外关系（帝国、英联邦、美国）的重要性。英国和法国的例子表明，在这些国家的政府机构内部，政治家、常驻官员和外交官对应该在多大程度上对欧洲做出承诺，作为其更广泛的外交和帝国政策的一部分，持有不同的观点。研究英国外交关系的历史学家们一致认为，大陆战略和帝国战略之间存在非此即彼的竞争，而实际上，这两种观点同时被不同的常任官员、外交官和他们的政治主子群体所持有。法国的情况与此类似。在法国，政治家和官员网络对如何为法国继续扮演帝国和世界角色提供必要的安全持不同意见。虽然一些人认为，像第一次世界大战之前一样，她的安全在于一个更松散的联盟网络，但其他人越来越多地致力于建立一种制度形式的欧洲一体化。关于欧洲各国外交部常任官员审议欧洲一体化问题的过程，人们做的工作很少；当这样做的时候，它往往与冷战战略问题有关。关于二战前欧洲一体化的研究就更少了；没有比较性质的著作考虑外交政策制定和网络对法国外交部或英国外交和联邦事务部（FCO）欧洲理想的影响。这项工作对英国外交部、法国外交部和欧盟委员会的政策制定者有相当大的好处。英国外交部目前的优先事项是更好地理解本项目将有助于实现的当代政策的历史视角。这对所有欧盟成员国和未来加入欧盟的国家中从事外交政策研究和制定工作的人也大有裨益。我们打算将我们的研究作为为英国和法国外交官和常驻官员以及与欧盟联络的组织（如英国常驻欧盟代表（UKREP））举办一系列研讨会的基础。

This project concerns the intellectual framework applied by civil servants (permanent officials) who formulated British and French foreign policy between 1919 and 1957 and how they decided whether an integrated European approach to international security was preferable to a more traditional single state strategy. Research on the history of European integration has tended to focus on policy at government level; little attention has been given to how policy was formulated and executed within foreign ministries and certainly not in any comparative way. And yet, the core political and diplomatic assumptions of the permanent officials should be intrinsic to our understanding of how the British and French foreign ministries, or networks within them, saw Europe as a solution to maintaining their international influence. We will also demonstrate how civil servants, including diplomats, reflected the value systems of those who appointed them and those who trained them, although it is not always true that they reflected the priorities of the government ministers whom they served. Even though Britain and France became members of the European Community at different moments, they have been chosen because they are nation-states of similar populations, with similar imperial histories and world roles, they are both permanent members of the UN Security Council, leading members of NATO and of the EU. Nevertheless, historically these two countries have viewed the concept of European security and integration differently, with Britain placing more emphasis on the importance of overseas ties (Empire, Commonwealth, US) than the French have chosen to do. The British and French examples reveal how within the machinery of government of these states different views were held by politicians, permanent officials and diplomats about how far a commitment should be made to Europe as part of their wider foreign and imperial policy. The consensus among historians of British foreign relations is of an either/or contest between a continental and an imperial strategy, when in reality both views were held simultaneously by different groupings of permanent officials, diplomats and their political masters. The French case is similar. In France competing views were held by politicians and networks of officials about how to provide the security necessary for France to continue to play an imperial and world role. While some believed her security lay, as before the First World War, in a more loosely based network of alliances, others were increasingly committed to an institutional form of European integration.Very little work has been done on the process by which the permanent officials of the foreign ministries of European states considered the question of European integration; when this has been done it tends to be in relation to Cold War strategic questions. Even fewer studies are to be found on European integration prior to the Second World War; and no works of a comparative nature consider foreign policy-making and the influence of networks in relation to the European ideal in the French Foreign Ministry or British Foreign and Commonwealth Office(FCO).This work has considerable benefits for policy makers in the FCO, the French Foreign Ministry and in the European Commission. It is a current FCO priority to understand better the historical perspective on present-day policies to which this project would contribute. It would also be of great benefit to those engaged in the study and formulation of foreign policy amongst all EU members and future accession countries. It is our intention to use our research as the basis for a series of workshops for British and French diplomats and permanent officials as well as organisations that liaise with the EU such as the United Kingdom Permananent Representation to the European Union (UKREP).