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

这个项目关注的是1919年至1957年期间制定英国和法国外交政策的公务员（常任官员）所采用的知识框架，以及他们如何决定欧洲一体化的国际安全方法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;很少关注外交部内部如何制定和执行政策，当然也没有以任何比较的方式。然而，常任官员的核心政治和外交假设应该是我们理解英国和法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。尽管英国和法国在不同的时刻成为欧洲共同体的成员，但它们被选中是因为它们是人口相似的民族国家，有着相似的帝国历史和世界角色，它们都是联合国安理会理事会常任理事国，北约和欧盟的主要成员。然而，从历史上看，这两个国家对欧洲安全和一体化的看法不同，英国比法国更重视海外关系（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器中，政治家、常任官员和外交官对作为其更广泛的外交和帝国政策的一部分，应该在多大程度上对欧洲作出承诺持有不同的观点。英国外交关系史学家的共识是，大陆战略和帝国战略之间存在非此即彼的竞争，而实际上，常任官员、外交官及其政治领袖的不同群体同时持有这两种观点。法国的情况类似。在法国，政治家和官员网络对如何为法国继续发挥帝国和世界作用提供必要的安全持有不同的观点。虽然有些人认为，与第一次世界大战前一样，她的安全在于一个基础较为松散的联盟网络，但其他人则越来越致力于建立一种制度化的欧洲一体化形式，关于欧洲国家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;当这样做时，它往往与冷战战略问题有关。关于第二次世界大战前欧洲一体化的研究就更少了;法国外交部或英国外交和联邦事务部没有比较性的著作考虑外交政策的制定和网络对欧洲理想的影响，这项工作对外交和联邦事务部、法国外交部和欧洲联盟委员会的决策者有相当大的好处。外交和联邦事务部目前的一个优先事项是更好地了解本项目将促进的当今政策的历史观点。这也将大大有利于那些从事研究和制定外交政策的所有欧盟成员国和未来的加入国。我们打算利用我们的研究作为一系列研讨会的基础，为英国和法国外交官和常驻官员以及与欧盟联系的组织，如英国常驻欧盟代表处（UKREP）。

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).