Dilemma of BREXIT

Europe witnesses it’s first-of-its-sort tragedy throughout EU history. UK became the first country to ‘divorce’ EU since its creation. The event has become the headline in every prominent news and it still continues to be. As there were Leavers and Keepers, now there are pessimists and optimists about the future of both EU and UK.

When Conservative Party won the elections last year, Eurosceptics pressured the party to hold a referendum about the membership of UK in EU. David Cameron, in order not to lose vote against Ukip, agreed to hold the referendum. Since then very harsh campaigns started on both sides- Pro and Anti EU campaigns. Till the last moment David Cameron, and even the Leavers, believed that UK chose to stay in EU. However, the final results brought the hard reality- British people, with 52% majority, chose to leave the EU. So, what are the possible results of BREXIT?

EU split

[intense_heading font_size=”16″ font_color=”primary”]Membership and EU [/intense_heading]

UK is the first country leaving EU, so it’s totally uncertain how they come into agreement. According to the Article 50 of the ‘Treaty of European Union’, any member state may decide to withdraw from the union in accordance with its constitutional requirements. After notifying EU about its intention, a period begins during which a leaving agreement is negotiated setting out the arrangements for the withdrawal and outlining the country’s future relationship with the Union. For the agreement to enter into force, the agreement should be approved by at least 72% of the current member states representing at least 65% of their population, and afterwards the consent of the European Parliament. The treaties cease to apply to the member state concerned on the entry into force of the leaving agreement, or in the absence of such an agreement, two years after the member state notified the European Council of its intent to leave, although this period can be extended by unanimous agreement of the European Council.

By leaving EU, UK wills to avoid all the regulations of European Union. It includes the immigration policies, united army plans, membership fees contributed to EU. Moreover, Leavers think that EU threatens the national sovereignty and corporate interests of UK. Out of all these reasons, it can be concluded that UK doesn’t want to depend on EU on many subjects. After leaving EU, UK believes it will be able to control its own policies which would benefit the nation more than it was under EU regulations.

UK divorce brought chaos to the EU. Rightwing leaders cheered to the divorce and now many nations also want to leave the membership. Even if EU survives, it will never be the same. Member states will be able to influence the decisions much easier than before, because now they have the divorce opportunity. Interests of individual members will harden the EU regulations and control.

[intense_heading font_size=”16″ font_color=”primary”]Economic Implications [/intense_heading]

Now UK has to think of trade relations with 27 individual members, foreign employees in Britain, British employees in EU member states, and it’s political direction. This concerns have already depressed the economy: already the asset values started to fall. Pound has plunged to its lowest rate. However, this shrink might make the export more competitive, but it’s still uncertain.

Pessimists argue that in the longer run, the uncertainty will decrease, but the economic costs of Brexit for UK still will exceed the benefits. Financial services and other globally competitive industries, which strongly depend on borderless market of EU, will come under pressure.  At the same time, UK will not free itself from financial regulations of Brussels, because it still has to accept them to have a trade agreements with big influencer states. According to optimists, UK will be able to grow its economy much better without being the member of EU. They argue that trade agreements will give almost the same benefits to UK without putting pressure on other subjects.

The main economic challenge of EU wouldn’t be the BREXIT. Even it would benefit Frankfurt and few other cities by gaining finance jobs at the expense of London. However, political threat of disintegration would harm the root of Eurozone and EU itself. If Spain, Greece, Italy, and France left EU, it would be the end of union.

[intense_heading font_size=”16″ font_color=”primary”]Security [/intense_heading]

Leavers argued that EU membership and eased border controls brought the terrorism to the country. However, a dozen senior military figures suggested that EU membership was an increasingly important pillar for UK Security. By being member state, UK had an access to the counter-terrorism intel of  EU which made the fight against terrorism much easier. Now this counter-terrorism co-operation comes to end. Moreover, on political affairs such as Russian issue the collective weight of union helped to continue more cleverly and bravely.

[intense_heading font_size=”16″ font_color=”primary”]USA, NATO, UK, EU [/intense_heading]

According to few researchers, we might see the dissolution of EU, NATO, and even the USA. With the break-up of UK, NATO will have difficulty of dictating its rules on EU, such as increasing the defense budget, and so on. UK is a vital partner to US and EU. The future of this partnerships is also threatened by the divorce.

[intense_heading font_size=”16″ font_color=”primary”]Dilemma [/intense_heading]

There are many reasons, many impacts, and many results of BREXIT. Different scholars, researchers, politicians, activists, corporate bodies see the event from their perspective and according to their interests. The reality is that UK was never in love with EU anyway. It was just a logical co-operation which came to an end because of the late issues of the union, such as economic crisis, immigration crisis, and terrorism crisis.

Because of being an independent state placed under the authority of the Crown, it was never the part of the European Union. Of course, it can no longer shelter the headquarters of some important enterprises which will move back into the EU, but on the contrary, it has its own plans and authority to execute those plans without the consent of anybody else.

Thierry Meyysan argues that, Just as Margaret Thatcher never hesitated to destroy British industry in order to transform her country into an international financial centre, in the same way the Conservatives did not hesitate to open the door for the independence of Scotland and Northern Ireland – and thus the loss of North Sea oil – in order to transform the City into the primary off shore financial centre for the yuan.

As a last word, though it is never a favorable choice to exit the union due to its uncertainty, either UK or EU will not collapse if they make a pivot in their strategies to benefit their ‘family’ more. On the other hand, if the private interests will still pressurize the union and split it into different parties, the end does not seem pleasant. Also for UK, if whatever plan they have in their mind that brought them to the break-up doesn’t work, it will be very hard for them to keep the status quo from now on.



About the author


Add comment

By hheydaroff