BREXIT: Does Britain really see the consequences?


BrexitThe British government has announced a referendum by the end of 2017 about leaving or remaining in the European Union. In the middle of a renegotiation process just to call for a referendum removes the own roots of what means integration and the essence of being part of a global community. Indeed, in today world is imperative to “move in block” to achieve real changes and to face with strength current and predicted future crises. The mistaken idea that extremist parties are trying to expand is isolation hence anti global policies that are definitely part of a “past picture” and do not respond to present standards.

At first glance the idea of breaking from a long-term commitment with not only an economic project but also social and moral seems to be a decision with poor analysis and short-sighted vision.

This is just about the external projection, internally there will be a break-up with UK, indeed a internal separation between England and Scotland that makes the eventual break with the Union even worse. Scotland has already announced that is in favour of continuing in the Union. That is so, that in case of leaving, it will deepen the differences even more. In fact, the Scottish National Party has threatened to hold a second independence referendum if British voters decide to leave the EU. This, the SNP’s leaders argue, would allow an independent Scotland to remain part of Europe, even as England, Wales, and Northern Ireland set out on their own.[1]

Brexit seems to be a very unskilful move to face not just current vulnerabilities, but future crises. Is important that Britain understand that we do not live under national sovereignties per se but under global rules with respectively global impacts. To be under a regional union or common market means also to face global crisis together, reducing and distributing the negative impacts. This kind of moves accentuates vulnerabilities and leaves UK fracture inside and weak for building future resilience from external shocks.

 Is it clear that the campaign strategy for leaving the Union will be around the traditional “tools” use it by extremist leaders: manipulating fear and hate over migrants, building confusion over terrorist attacks and global migration crisis; justification of rates of unemployment due to be part of the Union and not to a global financial crisis and/or a wrong national management. Definitely a general “cover up” of real concerns of the citizenship and weakness on internal national issues by adjudging all negative impact to the Union.

The real fears of British people according to Mori polls are about poverty, more than unemployment, which reflects the need to revise the official speech about a real concern of belonging to the Union, as it seems not much concern from the interested sectors. In addition, 82% of the British people think that an exit is too risky.[2]

 Prime Minister Cameron has shown serious and determinate ambitious for Britain by an extended range of demands like: resist any move towards an European Army, don´t participate in EU bailouts, more power to national Parliaments, specific recognition of accepting more currencies than the Euro, restrictions not just for massive migrations movements but also in its work benefits, more protection for the City…. in few words: not participating on EU goal of an “even closer union”.

 In addition, this decision does not only affect European relationships but also with the US. In case of leaving it´d be bad news for US as it need UK united and full inserted in the EU to give coherence and consistence for a global trade agreement.

 Above all, the timing for asking for new conditions to the EU –“wish list”- comes after the announcement for a referendum showing clearly the hidden agenda and political intention for not entering in a real negotiation process. Going through the points we could see that it display an anti global mentality. Introducing the sovereignty element into a claim to reform the Union represents a controversial point that does not fit not just for a healthy integration with the EU but also for an updated global view of the world.

“Nobody wins if the UK leaves the European Union”[3]

 This referendum has no legitimate defense, and is precisely the joint action on borders and on security measures that would give light for solutions in the medium term. However, I agree with concerns and demands from Britain regarding the negative impact that supposes being part of a common union, but Europe has shown political will and respect and it has been opened enough for negotiation and renegotiation.

 In the end the renegotiation terms from Britain are at least logical, not the referendum or the threat in itself of leaving the Union. But what is also logical is to work and wait for EU answers regarding those demands, and of course be opened to reshape Union conditions to the rest of the country members not just for Britain.

Crises mean a threat for European Union institutions stability that only by a strong leadership and joint efforts from governments could be overcome. Instead, the proposal is to break not only with the EU but to resign to a global status quo without taking in account, that is precisely an integrated system of institutions the one that could give hope that those crises could be managed in a successful way.[4]

 Now is time for Britain to show political will to invest in this economic-moral project by contributing in joint efforts to reshape a new and stronger Union, walking through a path of global, democratic and practical attitude towards building resilience in a threaten EU.





[4] ‪ 


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s