There have been interesting debates in both the Times and the Yorkshire Post about the comparative roles the European Union and NATO have played in helping peace prosper in the most of Europe over the last 60 years.

The difference between the two was very well surmised by a James Rodgers in the Times who said that NATO kept a “negative peace” while the EU has built a “positive peace”.

When the Treaty of Rome was set out in 1951 peace, along with social and economic prosperity, was one of its major objectives.

In the space of 60 years the EU has helped countries previously at war form excellent relationships and work closely together on a wide variety of issues.

Rather than simply work to avoid potential external aggression, like NATO, the EU has sought to ensure peace within its borders through profound economic co-operation, including a single market, and through encouraging exchanges of all kinds among citizens.

This contrasts with NATO, which, despite achieving its main goal of dissuading external aggression, failed to keep peace between its own members (the conflict between Turkey and Greece) and alllowed Portugal to be a member when it was a dictatorship.

There is no doubt that both have played a role, but that of the EU has been far more profound than that of NATO.