Rashid A Mughal
FUTURE historians will probably remember 2020 as the year when an enfeebled and vulnerable Europe chose to make itself feebler and more vulnerable. The task for its leaders now is to avoid making matters even worse. Nothing can be taken for granted in the United Kingdom these days, but it is now very likely that 2020 will be the year when Brexit finally happens. A majority of UK citizens will probably be relieved to bring this seemingly endless agony to a close, while most European leaders are likely to be glad not to have to argue over another postponement. But questions will remain.
To the question – “Who lost Britain? The answer must be, first and foremost, Britain itself. Whatever mistakes the European Union’s other 27 members may have made, they cannot be held responsible for extraordinary behaviour of UK’s three equally amateurish governments of the last five years. Yet, there are deeper lessons to be drawn from what happened in Britain. The first, as Wolfgang Münchau pointed out in Financial Times, is that the battle in UK over EU membership was lost long before it was fought. Since the 1990s, leading pundits and media outlets have routinely portrayed EU as a stifling bureaucracy obsessed with expanding its own power; a few senior politicians have dared to confront such prejudices.
Despite having her negotiated EU withdrawal deal soundly rejected in the House of Commons, the then British Prime Minister, Theresa May remained in charge of the Brexit process. To avert a disastrous “no-deal” scenario, the Bloc’s leaders continued to work with May on a compromise solution. After 31 months of the United Kingdom and the European Union arguing over Brexit, the truth is that neither side knew what it wanted. This sad reality is most obvious in the case of the UK, whose ruling Conservative Party has consistently been at war with itself over the actual meaning of the June 2016 Brexit referendum. After a series of strategic mishaps and tactical blunders by PM Theresa May, the Tory infighting came to ahead in mid-Jan 2018, when Parliament voted down her negotiated exit agreement. It made clear that May lacks support within her own party for a realistic compromise with EU.
At the same time, a majority of MPs and British voters opposed the “no-deal” exit advocated by hard line Tory Euro skeptics. That scenario put the UK in breach of legally binding international commitments, jeopardize the 1998 agreement that ended violent sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland, and resulted in immediate economic costs and job losses. At a time when US President Donald Trump is hastening the demise of the post-war global order, it is frankly stunning that Brexiteers still believe in the fantasy of a thriving, free-trading Global Britain.
The fact is that Britain mismanaged the issue by unwise policies. 2016 referendum was a split decision (49 vs 51). At that time the tempers were high due to wave after wave of migrants from war-torn areas in the Middle East who were looking for a safe abode. They were crossing English Channel in thousands every day and were looking for jobs and assistance from the government. In addition, since there was free movement of EU nationals into UK, people from less-affluent European countries like Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Hungry swarmed to UK where they found jobs easily. This created a sense of fear among the local residents that their jobs will be at stake if the migration continues unchecked as EU nationals enjoy free movement to enter UK. The Brexit referendum was thus a ideal platform for them to express their will and they voted for it, mainly for above reasons.
The purpose of referendum was to elicit people’s opinion and the government was duty bound to implement it. But here is where the diplomacy and skill of negotiating ideal deal come in. Theresa May and her team could not get the trade and economic concessions UK needed from EU after Brexit. The deal or no-deal debate went on for a year or more. The financial and trade agreements signed by UK are now subject of urgent attention as UK has indicated that it might override it and the EU leaders have threatened legal action according to international law, if that happens. It comes as the PM is set to push through a bill that would rip up parts of his own Brexit agreement, which the government has admitted could break international law. Johnson is facing mounting cross-party criticism and a Tory rebellion over his plans, which would ‘row back’ on parts of the deal relating to Northern Ireland. Shadow Justice Secretary Lord Falconer warned: ‘A future where (the) UK breaks its international law obligations, and opts out of human rights protections is a very bad future.’ The PM has warned that Brussels could ‘carve up our country’ without his new Bill. Former Prime Ministers, Sir John Major and Tony Blair, united to urge MPs to reject the legislation, saying “it imperils the Irish peace process, trade negotiations and the UK’s integrity. They wrote: ‘We both opposed Brexit. We both accept it is now happening. But this way of negotiating, with reason cast aside in pursuit of ideology and cavalier bombast posing as serious diplomacy, is irresponsible, wrong in principle and dangerous in practice. ‘It raises questions that go far beyond the impact on Ireland, the peace process and negotiations for a trade deal – crucial though they are. It questions the very integrity of our nation.” Conservative rebels now want former Prime Minister Theresa May to lead an in-party uprising against Boris Johnson’s plan to break international law and dismantle his Brexit deal with the EU.
According to reports in Business Insider a growing number of MPs are set to vote against the government in parliament next week, with people involved in drafting an amendment saying they feel it has “a good chance of significant support.” The rebels are seeking to enlist Johnson’s predecessor to front the campaign against his plan after she spoke out against the moves last week. May is one of four former leaders to have attacked Johnson’s moves, with Michael Howard, Tony Blair and John Major, warning “it could damage our reputation for probity and respect for the rule of law”. According to a recent survey carried out in UK, 86% people expect Britain’s economy to be worse off after leaving the EU (compared with 77% pre-Brexit), with a German fund stating that “Britain will lose access to one of its major trade partners”. Britain could suffer in the long term as it will face difficulty in trade agreements with EU countries; resulting in diminished trade flows with EU and weaker political influence; currency depreciation; and difficulty in reaching trade agreements with non-EU countries. The chief investment officer of a UK fund says simply: “There is nothing positive about Brexit.” Brexit will have a negative impact on London’s position as a global financial centre.
— The writer is former DG (Emigration) and consultant ILO, IOM.
