• Images
• Videos
• Documents
• Books
• Articles

Provisions

The EDC would entail a unified defence, divided into national components, funded by a common budget, common arms, centralized military procurement, and institutions.

Diagram showing the functioning of the institutions outlined in the treaty, the placing of the European Defence Forces at the disposal of the Community, and the link between the EDC and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO, with reference to this organisation's Supreme Allied Commander Europe and Council):

Preamble

Establishes the intent to strengthen peace and unity in Europe, ensure security, and lay the groundwork for eventual political federation.

Title I – Fundamental Provisions

Chapter I – The European Defence Community

Articles 1–7: Legal foundation, aims, principles (e.g., peaceful purpose, equal treatment, NATO cooperation), juridical personality.

Chapter II – The European Defence Forces

Articles 8–12: Establishment of integrated armed forces; restrictions and exceptions for national forces (e.g., police, UN missions, royal guards).

Title II – Institutions of the Community

Chapter I – General Provisions

Articles 13–20: Overview of the four institutions: Council of Ministers, Commissariat, Assembly, Court of Justice. Defines legal powers and responsibilities.

Chapter II – The Council of Ministers

Articles 21–30: Composition, voting rules, responsibilities in policy, defense, finance, and inter-institutional cooperation.

Chapter III – The Commissariat

Articles 31–40: Executive arm of the Community, responsible for administration, budget execution, operational command, and reporting.

Chapter IV – The Assembly

Articles 41–48: Legislative and supervisory body; representatives from member states; powers include approval of budget and motions of censure.

Chapter V – The Court of Justice

Articles 49–60: Judicial authority to interpret and ensure uniform application of the treaty; jurisdiction over institutions and member states.

Title III – The Military Organization of the Community

Articles 61–71: Details the military command structure, staff organization, training standards, and integration procedures.

Title IV – Financial Provisions

Articles 72–84: Establishes Community budget, financial contributions, auditing, and control of expenditures.

Title V – General Obligations of Member States

Articles 85–90: Obligations regarding treaty compliance, cooperation, enforcement of Community decisions, and prohibition of conflicting agreements.

Title VI – Relations with Other Organizations

Articles 91–95: Outlines relations with NATO, the UN, and other international organizations to ensure coordination and consistency.

Title VII – Personnel of the Community

Articles 96–104: Legal status, discipline, and rights of military and civilian personnel under the Community's jurisdiction.

Title VIII – Property and Procurement

Articles 105–113: Rules on armaments, shared resources, procurement procedures, and allocation of infrastructure.

Title IX – Transitional and Special Provisions

Articles 114–120: Transitional arrangements for integrating national forces and institutions; special protocols for initial phases.

Title X – Final Provisions

Articles 121–132:

• Signature and Ratification: Procedures for treaty adoption.
• Entry into Force: Conditions for the treaty to become active.
• Amendment Procedures
• Accession of New States
• Authentic Texts

Annexes and Protocols

• Military Protocol
• Financial Protocol
• Protocol on Jurisdiction
• Convention on the Status of Forces
• Protocols related to NATO and the UN

Ratification

The table below summarizes the status of ratification of the treaty by the signatory states. By 1954 4 states had completed ratification, with the process in the remaining 2 states on hold.

Potential resumption of ratification procedure

Recent geopolitical developments—including the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the re-election of U.S. President Donald Trump in 2024—have renewed interest in the treaty. A 2024 article by Professor Federico Fabbrini at Dublin City University¹⁶¹⁷, as well as a 2025 study led by former French defence minister Sylvie Goulard ¹⁸ , have found that it is still legally feasible for Italy and France to ratify the treaty, thereby bringing it into force. This suggests that the ratification process that halted in 1954, may proceed.

Status in France

On 30 August 1954, the French National Assembly voted 264 against, 319 in favour and 31 abstentions on a motion for indefinite postponement of ratification.¹⁹

By the time of the vote, concerns about a future conflict faded with the death of Joseph Stalin and the end of the Korean War. Concomitant to these fears were a severe disjuncture between the original Pleven Plan of 1950 and the one defeated in 1954. Divergences included military integration at the division rather than battalion level and a change in the command structure putting NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) in charge of EDC operational capabilities. The reasons that led to the failed ratification of the Treaty were twofold, concerning major changes in the international scene, as well as domestic problems of the French Fourth Republic.²⁰ There were Gaullist fears that the EDC threatened France's national sovereignty, constitutional concerns about the indivisibility of the French Republic, and fears about West Germany's remilitarization. French Communists opposed a plan tying France to the capitalist United States and setting it in opposition to the Communist bloc. Other legislators worried about the absence of the United Kingdom.

The Prime Minister, Pierre Mendès-France, tried to placate the treaty's detractors by attempting to ratify additional protocols with the other signatory states. These included the sole integration of covering forces, or in other words, those deployed within West Germany, as well as the implementation of greater national autonomy in regard to budgetary and other administrative questions. Despite the central role for France, the EDC plan collapsed when it failed to obtain ratification in the French Parliament.

Status in Italy

The original ratification process in Italy was halted after the French National Assembly voted for indefinite postponement.

After the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the re-election of US President Trump in 2024, the treaty has regained interest.²¹

On 3 April 3 2025, deputy Mauro Del Barba (Italia Viva – Centro – Renew Europe) tabled a bill to ratify the treaty in both chambers of Parliament. As of now, the bill is still under review and has not yet been assigned to a specific committee for further consideration.^22232425

History

Further information: History of the Common Security and Defence Policy

Background

During the late 1940s, the divisions created by the Cold War were becoming evident. The United States looked with suspicion at the growing power of the USSR and European states felt vulnerable, fearing a possible Soviet occupation. In this climate of mistrust and suspicion, the United States considered the rearmament of West Germany as a possible solution to enhance the security of Europe and of the whole Western bloc.²⁶

In August 1950, Winston Churchill proposed the creation of a common European army, including German soldiers, in front of the Council of Europe:

“We should make a gesture of practical and constructive guidance by declaring ourselves in favour of the immediate creation of a European Army under a unified command, and in which we should all bear a worthy and honourable part.”

— Winston Churchill, speech at the Council of Europe 1950²⁷

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe subsequently adopted the resolution put forward by the United Kingdom and officially endorsed the idea:

“The Assembly, in order to express its devotion to the maintenance of peace and its resolve to sustain the action of the Security Council of the United Nations in defence of peaceful peoples against aggression, calls for the immediate creation of a unified European Army subject to proper European democratic control and acting in full co-operation with the United States and Canada.”

— Resolution of the Council of Europe 1950²⁸

In September 1950, Dean Acheson, under a cable submitted by High Commissioner John J. McCloy, proposed a new plan to the European states; the American plan, called package, sought to enhance NATO's defense structure, creating 12 West German divisions. However, after the destruction that Germany had caused during World War II, European countries, in particular France, were not ready to see the reconstruction of the German military.²⁹ Finding themselves in the midst of the two superpowers, they looked at this situation as a possibility to enhance the process of integrating Europe, trying to obviate the loss of military influence caused by the new bipolar order and thus supported a common army.³⁰

1950-1951: Launch of the Pleven Plan

The treaty was initiated by the Pleven plan, proposed in 1950 by then French Prime Minister René Pleven in response to the American call for the rearmament of West Germany. The formation of a pan-European defence architecture, as an alternative to West Germany's proposed accession to NATO, was meant to harness the German military potential in case of conflict with the Soviet bloc. Just as the Schuman Plan was designed to end the risk of Germany having the economic power on its own to make war again, the Pleven Plan and EDC were meant to prevent the military possibility of Germany's making war again.

On 24 October 1950, France's Prime Minister René Pleven proposed a new plan, which took his name although it was drafted mainly by Jean Monnet, that aimed to create a supranational European army. With this project, France tried to satisfy America's demands, avoiding, at the same time, the creation of German divisions, and thus the rearmament of Germany.³¹³²

“Confident as it is that Europe’s destiny lies in peace and convinced that all the peoples of Europe need a sense of collective security, the French Government proposes […] the creation, for the purposes of common defence, of a European army tied to the political institutions of a united Europe.”

— René Pleven, speech at the French Parliament 1950³³

The EDC was to include West Germany, France, Italy, and the Benelux countries. The United States would be excluded. It was a competitor to NATO (in which the US played the dominant role), with France playing the dominant role. Just as the Schuman Plan was designed to end the risk of Germany having the economic power to make war again, the Pleven Plan and EDC were meant to prevent the same possibility. Britain approved of the plan in principle, but agreed to join only if the supranational element was decreased.³⁴

According to the Pleven Plan, the European Army was supposed to be composed of military units from the member states, and directed by a council of the member states’ ministers. Although with some doubts and hesitation, the United States and the six members of the ECSC approved the Pleven Plan in principle.

1951-1952: Negotiations and signing

The initial approval of the Pleven Plan led the way to the Paris Conference, launched in February 1951, where it was negotiated the structure of the supranational army.

France feared the loss of national sovereignty in security and defense, and thus a truly supranational European Army could not be tolerated by Paris.³⁵ However, because of the strong American interest in a West German army, a draft agreement for a modified Pleven Plan, renamed the European Defense Community (EDC), was ready in May 1952, with French support.

On 27 May 1952 the foreign ministers of the six 'inner' countries of European integration signed the treaty:³⁶

• Belgium: Paul Van Zeeland
• France: Robert Schuman
• Italy: Alcide De Gasperi
• Luxembourg: Joseph Bech
• Netherlands: Dirk Stikker
• West Germany: Konrad Adenauer

A European Political Community (EPC) was proposed in 1952 as a combination of the existing European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and the proposed European Defence Community (EDC). A draft EPC treaty, as drawn up by the ECSC assembly (now the European Parliament), would have seen a directly elected assembly ("the Peoples’ Chamber"), a senate appointed by national parliaments and a supranational executive accountable to the parliament.

1953-1954: Partial ratification

In 1953 and 1954, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany ratified the treaty.

1954-present: Prolonged suspension of French and Italian ratification

Following the French National Assembly's vote to indefinitely postpone ratification in 1954, Italian ratification was also put on hold.

This resulted in the

• Abandonment of the European Political Community idea.³⁷³⁸
• The London and Paris Conferences provided for West Germany's accession to NATO³⁹ and the Western European Union (WEU), the latter of which was a transformed version of the pre-existing Western Union.
• Meeting of European leaders in the Messina Conference in 1955, where they established the Spaak Committee which would pave the way for the creation of the European Economic Community (EEC). The EEC member states tried to create foreign policy cooperation in the De Gaulle-sponsored Fouchet Plan (1959–1962). European foreign policy was finally established during the third attempt with the European Political Cooperation (EPC) (1970). This became the predecessor of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Today the European Union and NATO, and formerly also the Western European Union, all carry out some of the functions which was envisaged for the EDC, although none approach the degree of supranational military control that the EDC would have provided for.

Since the end of World War II, sovereign European countries have entered into treaties and thereby co-operated and harmonised policies (or pooled sovereignty) in an increasing number of areas, in the European integration project or the construction of Europe (French: la construction européenne). The following timeline outlines the legal inception of the European Union (EU)—the principal framework for this unification. The EU inherited many of its present responsibilities from the European Communities (EC), which were founded in the 1950s in the spirit of the Schuman Declaration.

See also

• European Union portal

• History of the European Union
• Western Union
• Western European Union
• European Political Community (1952)
• Common Foreign and Security Policy (1993–present)
• European Security and Defence Identity (ESDI)
• European Security and Defence Policy (1999–present)
• Treaty of Brussels
• European Defence Agency

Further reading

• Fursdon, Edward. The European Defence Community: A History (1980), the standard history online
• Judt, Tony (2005). Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945. Penguin Press. ISBN 978-1-59420-065-6.
• Ruane, Kevin. The Rise and Fall of the European Defence Community: Anglo-American Relations and the Crisis of European Defense, 1950–55 Palgrave, 2000. 252 pp.
• Guillen, Pierre. "France and the Defence of Western Europe: From the Brussels Pact (March 1948) to the Pleven Plan (October 1950)." in The Western Security Community: Common Problems and Conflicting Interests during the Foundation Phase of the North Atlantic Alliance, ed. Norbert Wigershaus and Roland G. Foerster (Oxford UP, 1993), pp 125–48.
• Van der Harst, J. (2003). The Atlantic Priority: Defence Policy of the Netherlands at the Time of the European Defence Community. Florence: European Press Academic Publishing. ISBN 8883980220.
• Weigall, David (1991). "British perceptions of the European Defence Community". In Stirk, Peter Michael Robert; Willis, David (eds.). Shaping Postwar Europe: European Unity and Disunity, 1945-1957. London: Pinter. pp. 90–99. ISBN 0-86187-161-8.
• Varsori, Antonio (1991). "Italy and the European Defence Community: 1950-54". In Stirk, Peter Michael Robert; Willis, David (eds.). Shaping Postwar Europe: European Unity and Disunity, 1945-1957. London: Pinter. pp. 100–111. ISBN 0-86187-161-8.

External links

• EDC Treaty (unofficial translation) see pg 2
• EDC information on European Navigation
• Activating The Law Creatively To Integrate Defense In Europe (ALCIDE) Project, Dublin City University
• EUROPEAN ARMY: De Gaulle's Alternative De Gaulle's Alternative - TIME
• Archival material concerning the EDC can be consulted at the Historical Archives of the European Union in Florence.

References

1. Pastor-Castro, Rogelia (2006). "The Quai d'Orsay and the European Defence Community Crisis of 1954". History. 91 (3): 386–400. doi:10.1111/j.1468-229X.2006.00371.x. JSTOR 24427965. /wiki/History_(journal) ↩

2. https://alcideproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/ALCIDE-Policy-Brief.pdf https://alcideproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/ALCIDE-Policy-Brief.pdf ↩

3. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eulj.12531 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eulj.12531 ↩

4. https://www.senato.it/leg/19/BGT/Schede/Ddliter/59054.htm https://www.senato.it/leg/19/BGT/Schede/Ddliter/59054.htm ↩

5. https://podcasts.apple.com/no/podcast/policy-voices-getting-serious-about-european-defence/id958963646?i=1000703979473&l=nb https://podcasts.apple.com/no/podcast/policy-voices-getting-serious-about-european-defence/id958963646?i=1000703979473&l=nb ↩

6. https://alcideproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/ALCIDE-Policy-Brief.pdf https://alcideproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/ALCIDE-Policy-Brief.pdf ↩

7. "Vergadering van vrijdag 12 maart 1954" [Meeting of Friday March, 12 1954] (PDF). www.senate.be (in Dutch). p. 1223. https://www.senate.be/handann/S0046/S00461562/S00461562.pdf ↩

8. "Vergadering van Donderdag 26 November 1953" [Meeting of Thursday November, 26 1953] (PDF). www3.dekamer.be (in Dutch). p. 14. https://www3.dekamer.be/digidocanha/K0052/K00520649/K00520649.PDF ↩

9. Schukraft-Wadle, Corina: Die Anfänge deutscher Europapolitik in den 1950er und 1960er Jahren. Weichenstellungen unter Konrad Adenauer und Bewahrung des Status quo unter seinen Nachfolgern Ludwig Erhard und Kurt Georg Kiesinger, in: Gisela Müller-Brandeck-Bocquet (ed.): Deutsche Europapolitik. Von Merkel bis Adenauer, Wiesbaden 2021, p. 1-58, here p. 18. ↩

10. Schukraft-Wadle, Corina: Die Anfänge deutscher Europapolitik in den 1950er und 1960er Jahren. Weichenstellungen unter Konrad Adenauer und Bewahrung des Status quo unter seinen Nachfolgern Ludwig Erhard und Kurt Georg Kiesinger, in: Gisela Müller-Brandeck-Bocquet (ed.): Deutsche Europapolitik. Von Merkel bis Adenauer, Wiesbaden 2021, p. 1-58, here p. 18. ↩

11. https://www.senato.it/leg/19/BGT/Schede/Ddliter/59054.htm https://www.senato.it/leg/19/BGT/Schede/Ddliter/59054.htm ↩

12. https://www.camera.it/leg19/126?&leg=19&idDocumento=2342 https://www.camera.it/leg19/126?&leg=19&idDocumento=2342 ↩

13. The European Defence Community: Problems of Ratification by John W. Young. ↩

14. "EDC: The European Army. Dead, Dying or Durable" (JPG). magazineproject.org. 10 August 1953. https://magazineproject.org/TIMEvault/1953/1953-08-10/1953-08-10%20page%2024.jpg ↩

15. "16e vergadering" [16th meeting] (PDF). repository.overheid.nl (in Dutch). 20 January 1954. Retrieved 24 July 2024. https://repository.overheid.nl/frbr/sgd/19531954/0000281862/1/pdf/SGD_19531954_0000019.pdf ↩

16. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eulj.12531 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eulj.12531 ↩

17. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00396338.2025.2459016?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00396338.2025.2459016?utm_source=chatgpt.com ↩

18. https://alcideproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/ALCIDE-Policy-Brief.pdf https://alcideproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/ALCIDE-Policy-Brief.pdf ↩

19. https://alcideproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/ALCIDE-Policy-Brief.pdf https://alcideproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/ALCIDE-Policy-Brief.pdf ↩

20. "The European Defense Community in the French National Assembly: A Roll Call Analysis". Comparative Politics. 2. ↩

21. https://podcasts.apple.com/no/podcast/policy-voices-getting-serious-about-european-defence/id958963646?i=1000703979473&l=nb https://podcasts.apple.com/no/podcast/policy-voices-getting-serious-about-european-defence/id958963646?i=1000703979473&l=nb ↩

22. https://www.senato.it/leg/19/BGT/Schede/Ddliter/59054.htm https://www.senato.it/leg/19/BGT/Schede/Ddliter/59054.htm ↩

23. https://www.camera.it/leg19/126?&leg=19&idDocumento=2342 https://www.camera.it/leg19/126?&leg=19&idDocumento=2342 ↩

24. https://www.ilriformista.it/europa-e-difesa-von-der-leyen-fa-la-comandante-sanchez-illude-perche-litalia-dovrebbe-riavviare-la-ratifica-della-ced-462838/ https://www.ilriformista.it/europa-e-difesa-von-der-leyen-fa-la-comandante-sanchez-illude-perche-litalia-dovrebbe-riavviare-la-ratifica-della-ced-462838/ ↩

25. https://torinocronaca.it/news/torino/495990/italia-viva-piemonte-inizia-il-tesseramento-2025-con-focus-sull-europa-e-riforme-strategiche.html https://torinocronaca.it/news/torino/495990/italia-viva-piemonte-inizia-il-tesseramento-2025-con-focus-sull-europa-e-riforme-strategiche.html ↩

26. Ruane, Kevin (2000). The Rise and Fall of the European Defence Community: Anglo-American Relations and the Crisis of European Defense, 1950–55. pp. 1, 2. ↩

27. "Address given by Winston Churchill to the Council of Europe (Strasbourg, 11 August 1950)". 14 May 2013. Retrieved 3 July 2021. https://www.cvce.eu/en/obj/address_given_by_winston_churchill_to_the_council_of_europe_strasbourg_11_august_1950-en-ed9e513b-af3b-47a0-b03c-8335a7aa237d.html ↩

28. "Address given by Winston Churchill to the Council of Europe (Strasbourg, 11 August 1950)". 14 May 2013. Retrieved 3 July 2021. https://www.cvce.eu/en/obj/address_given_by_winston_churchill_to_the_council_of_europe_strasbourg_11_august_1950-en-ed9e513b-af3b-47a0-b03c-8335a7aa237d.html ↩

29. Ruane, Kevin (2000). The Rise and Fall of the European Defence Community: Anglo-American Relations and the Crisis of European Defense, 1950–55. p. 4. ↩

30. "Background for the European Defence Community". Political Science Quarterly. 68. ↩

31. Ruane, Kevin (2000). The Rise and Fall of the European Defence Community: Anglo-American Relations and the Crisis of European Defense, 1950–55. pp. 4, 5. ↩

32. Pierre Guillen, "France and the Defence of Western Europe: From the Brussels Pact (March 1948) to the Pleven Plan (October 1950)." in The Western Security Community: Common Problems and Conflicting Interests during the Foundation Phase of the North Atlantic Alliance, ed. Norbert Wigershaus and Roland G. Foerster (1993), pp. 125–48. ↩

33. "Statement by René Pleven on the establishment of a European army (24 October 1950)" (PDF). Journal officiel de la République française. Débats Parlementaires. Assemblée nationale. 10.1950. Paris: Imprimerie nationale. "Déclaration du Gouverneur français René Pleven le 24 octobre 1950", p. 7118-7119. 24 October 1950. Retrieved 4 July 2021. https://www.cvce.eu/content/publication/1997/10/13/4a3f4499-daf1-44c1-b313-212b31cad878/publishable_en.pdf ↩

34. Alex May, Britain and Europe since 1945 (1999) pp. 18–34. ↩

35. Keukeleire, Stephan (2009). European Security and Defense Policy: From Taboo to a Spearhead of EU Foreign Policy. pp. 52–53. ↩

36. Ruane, Kevin (2000). The Rise and Fall of the European Defence Community: Anglo-American Relations and the Crisis of European Defense, 1950-55. p. 15. ↩

37. Richard T. Griffiths Europe's first constitution: the European Political Community, 1952–1954 in Stephen Martin, editor. The Construction of Europe: Essays in Honour of Emile Noël 19 (1994) ↩

38. European Political Community http://www.cvce.eu/obj/the_european_political_community-en-8b63810a-e5bd-4979-9d27-9a21c056fc8d.html ↩

39. Josef Joffe, "Europe's American Pacifier," Foreign Policy (1984) 54#1 pp. 64–82 in JSTOR https://www.jstor.org/stable/1148355 ↩

40. Although not EU treaties per se, these treaties affected the development of the EU defence arm, a main part of the CFSP. The Franco-British alliance established by the Dunkirk Treaty was de facto superseded by WU. The CFSP pillar was bolstered by some of the security structures that had been established within the remit of the 1955 Modified Brussels Treaty (MBT). The Brussels Treaty was terminated in 2011, consequently dissolving the WEU, as the mutual defence clause that the Lisbon Treaty provided for EU was considered to render the WEU superfluous. The EU thus de facto superseded the WEU. /wiki/History_of_the_Common_Security_and_Defence_Policy ↩

41. Although not EU treaties per se, these treaties affected the development of the EU defence arm, a main part of the CFSP. The Franco-British alliance established by the Dunkirk Treaty was de facto superseded by WU. The CFSP pillar was bolstered by some of the security structures that had been established within the remit of the 1955 Modified Brussels Treaty (MBT). The Brussels Treaty was terminated in 2011, consequently dissolving the WEU, as the mutual defence clause that the Lisbon Treaty provided for EU was considered to render the WEU superfluous. The EU thus de facto superseded the WEU. /wiki/History_of_the_Common_Security_and_Defence_Policy ↩

42. Although not EU treaties per se, these treaties affected the development of the EU defence arm, a main part of the CFSP. The Franco-British alliance established by the Dunkirk Treaty was de facto superseded by WU. The CFSP pillar was bolstered by some of the security structures that had been established within the remit of the 1955 Modified Brussels Treaty (MBT). The Brussels Treaty was terminated in 2011, consequently dissolving the WEU, as the mutual defence clause that the Lisbon Treaty provided for EU was considered to render the WEU superfluous. The EU thus de facto superseded the WEU. /wiki/History_of_the_Common_Security_and_Defence_Policy ↩

43. Although not EU treaties per se, these treaties affected the development of the EU defence arm, a main part of the CFSP. The Franco-British alliance established by the Dunkirk Treaty was de facto superseded by WU. The CFSP pillar was bolstered by some of the security structures that had been established within the remit of the 1955 Modified Brussels Treaty (MBT). The Brussels Treaty was terminated in 2011, consequently dissolving the WEU, as the mutual defence clause that the Lisbon Treaty provided for EU was considered to render the WEU superfluous. The EU thus de facto superseded the WEU. /wiki/History_of_the_Common_Security_and_Defence_Policy ↩

44. Although not EU treaties per se, these treaties affected the development of the EU defence arm, a main part of the CFSP. The Franco-British alliance established by the Dunkirk Treaty was de facto superseded by WU. The CFSP pillar was bolstered by some of the security structures that had been established within the remit of the 1955 Modified Brussels Treaty (MBT). The Brussels Treaty was terminated in 2011, consequently dissolving the WEU, as the mutual defence clause that the Lisbon Treaty provided for EU was considered to render the WEU superfluous. The EU thus de facto superseded the WEU. /wiki/History_of_the_Common_Security_and_Defence_Policy ↩

45. The European Communities obtained common institutions and a shared legal personality (i.e. ability to e.g. sign treaties in their own right). /wiki/European_Communities ↩

46. The treaties of Maastricht and Rome form the EU's legal basis, and are also referred to as the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), respectively. They are amended by secondary treaties. /wiki/Treaties_of_the_European_Union ↩

47. Between the EU's founding in 1993 and consolidation in 2009, the union consisted of three pillars, the first of which were the European Communities. The other two pillars consisted of additional areas of cooperation that had been added to the EU's remit. /wiki/Three_pillars_of_the_European_Union ↩

48. The consolidation meant that the EU inherited the European Communities' legal personality and that the pillar system was abolished, resulting in the EU framework as such covering all policy areas. Executive/legislative power in each area was instead determined by a distribution of competencies between EU institutions and member states. This distribution, as well as treaty provisions for policy areas in which unanimity is required and qualified majority voting is possible, reflects the depth of EU integration as well as the EU's partly supranational and partly intergovernmental nature. /wiki/Legal_person ↩