Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Richard Hakluyt]

Cameron will, belatedly, have learnt a lesson :

Don't have a referendum unless you are a dictator who can fix the result 

[Josquius]

Conspiracy time.
You know how the oldies are always moaning about how easy kids these days have it?

What if they're giving us this hardship on purpose?

[Duque de Bragança]

Cameron will, belatedly, have learnt a lesson :

Don't have a referendum unless you are a dictator who can fix the result 

A lesson Chirac learned too late as well, in 2005.

[Zanza]

Uncertainty rules OK
What next? Mr Cameron said before the vote that he would carry out the wishes of the British people by invoking immediately Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty, the only legal route to Brexit. Yet his likely resignation casts doubt on this. Leading Brexiteers have argued against Article 50, which they say is biased against the interests of a leaving country. It provides that the terms on which Britain leaves must be agreed by a majority of the EU's other 27 members, without a British vote. It sets a two-year deadline that can be extended only by unanimity. Because it is unlikely that a new trade deal with the EU can be completed in time, that may be negotiated separately—and it would still need the unanimous agreement of all 27 countries, as well as ratification by national parliaments.

Brexiteers want to avoid all this by negotiating informally. But diplomats in Brussels are clear that the other 27 countries will refuse to talk unless Article 50 is invoked. Nor will they be pleased by two other Leave ideas: immediately to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act and to scrap the supremacy of the European Court of Justice: such measures would be against international law and could be overturned in a British court. So the odds are that Britain will end up using Article 50.

The question is how generous the other 27 countries will be. And the answer is surely: not very. For the EU, Brexit is a catastrophe. Europe is beset by crises: the euro zone is troubled and divided, the refugee problem has not gone away, countries such as Hungary and Poland have lurched in an illiberal direction, and populist (and often anti-EU) parties are everywhere on the rise. Both France's president, François Hollande, and Germany's chancellor, Angela Merkel, face tricky elections next year.

The priority for the rest of the EU will be to make sure that nobody follows Britain's example. That precludes giving Britain a good deal. Leavers have retorted that, because Britain imports more from the EU than it sells to it, the other countries must offer a generous free-trade deal. But this betrays a misunderstanding of both EU politics and trade talks. The EU cannot let Britain have full access to the single market without its obligations lest others ask for similar treatment. And Germany cannot offer Britain anything on its own, however strongly its carmakers push for it. Any deal must be approved by all 27 countries, several of which do little trade with Britain. Spanish carmakers might like tariffs on cars traded between Britain and Germany. Romania sees little gain in a free-trade deal that lets Britain block immigration.

In practice the EU will offer Britain only two possible deals. The first is to join Norway in the European Economic Area. This would preserve full access to the single market. But, like Norway, Britain would have to make a hefty contribution to the EU budget (Norway pays about 85% as much as Britain per head), observe all EU single-market regulations with no say in making them and, crucially, accept free movement of people from the EU. It is hard to imagine a post-Brexit government accepting this. The second is a free-trade deal like the EU's with Canada. Yet this does not cover all trade, does not eliminate non-tariff barriers, excludes most financial services and could take years to agree.

The other option for Britain is to revert to trading with the EU as America, China and India do, under normal World Trade Organisation rules. But most economists say this would make the economic damage from Brexit worse. It would bring back mutual tariffs on cars, pharmaceuticals, food and fish. It would reinstate many non-tariff barriers. And it would exclude most services, including financial services.

The economic and trade problems arising from Brexit will dominate British politics for years to come. Security and foreign-policy concerns will also emerge. The home secretary, the security services and the police may try to replicate the co-ordinating measures that they have in place now with the rest of the EU, notably on intelligence-sharing. The Foreign Office may try to maintain its input into the EU's foreign-policy discussions. But none of this will be easy and some may be impossible.

There will also be questions over the future of the United Kingdom. Both Scotland and Northern Ireland voted by clear majorities to remain in the EU, only to be overruled by the English and Welsh. Before the vote Nicola Sturgeon, leader of the Scottish National Party, said Brexit might justify a second referendum on Scottish independence, though she is likely to proceed with caution. Northern Ireland will be more immediately troubled. If Britain ends free movement of people, that may require the return of a hard border between Northern Ireland and its southern neighbour.

The political fallout from the vote will extend far beyond the issue of Mr Cameron's successor. The Tories are more split than ever: around 185 of their MPs backed Remain, and they will not welcome a Brexiteer as leader. But Labour, too, is in trouble. Many pro-European Labour MPs blame Mr Corbyn's weak endorsement of Remain for the Leave victory. Labour lost Scotland at the 2015 election; it may now lose northern England, which voted heavily for Leave. The grinning Mr Farage was the only happy party leader on June 24th.

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21701264-britain-has-voted-leave-eu-what-follows-will-be-new-prime-minister-volatile-financial

[Legbiter]

[Legbiter]

Well Donald Trump's visit to the UK today is aptly timed after all

[alfred russel]

With a win so narrow, a mandate for more distance from the EU can't be assumed.

Leave means Leave. Not 95% remain.

Norway and Switzerland are not in the EU. For Britain to assume a similar relationship to the EU, they need to leave.

[Tamas]

Throwing 40 years worth of effort, cooperation, progress, for... well, for whatever it was thrown out for.

Good job, Britain.

[Maladict]

Norway and Switzerland are not in the EU. For Britain to assume a similar relationship to the EU, they need to leave.

Norway has to accept nearly all EU laws while not having a say in it. I somehow doubt that's what the Brexit people want.
And they'll need to have a huge oil fund magically appear to support the British economy for decades to come.

As for emulating Switzerland, well good luck with that 

[Monoriu]

The only way to kill an idea is to implement it.  To kill the idea that leaving the EU is somehow a good choice, it is necessary for a decent sized nation to try it.  They will only realise that the idea is not workable when they fail.  Too bad that people unhappy enough with the status quo will vote for anything that is different from the status quo, be it Trump, or Brexit. 

[The Larch]

[Crazy_Ivan80]

any thoughts on to what extent the Brexit is comparable to the temporary Frexit out of NATO?

[Liep]

It's funny because it's true.

[The Larch]

Query for Larch etc.

If Scotland now left the union do you think Spain would have an issue with Scotland basically inheriting the UK's EU membership?

No idea, maybe? Maybe not? It's such an unique situation that I don't think many paralels can be established.

What a time to be alive...who would have said that the first country in Western Europe to fall to knee jerk populism would be the UK?

[The Brain]

So much sweet sweet college age angst today!