The Brexit soap opera continues, with all eyes now fixed on the Irish frontier. The land border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic is open, but it will be difficult to keep it that way once the U.K. leaves the European Union. Late last year Theresa May’s government accepted Brussels’ demand for an “Irish backstop” in its Brexit plan—a commitment to introduce a customs border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the U.K. so that cross-border travel and trade would remain seamless. The unpopularity of this idea among U.K. Brexiteers is the chief reason Parliament voted down Prime Minister May’s proposed Brexit agreement with the EU.
Britain’s problem with the EU goes back decades. From the 1957 Treaty of Rome to the present day, Europe has been both the opportunity Britain cannot embrace and the problem Britain cannot solve. In the 1950s, Britain stood aloof from the increasingly integrated Continent as it clung to the remnants of its empire. In the 1960s it applied, twice, to join; both times its application was scuttled, twice by the implacable, but arguably correct, French President Charles de Gaulle. In 1973 Britain finally succeeded in joining the club, but euroskepticism was already so strong in British politics that the country held a referendum on leaving in 1975. Remain won that round, but British ambivalence over Europe has never gone away.
De Gaulle—the leader of the Free French resistance in World War II who went on to found the Fifth Republic under which France still lives today—understood the problem best. He thought Britain would never truly be at home in a European union. “England in effect is insular, she is maritime,” he said in his remarks blocking Britain’s entry into what was then called the Common Market in 1963. “She has in all her doings very marked and very original habits and traditions.” He added that “the nature, the structure, the very situation that are England’s differ profoundly from those of the continentals.”
Moreover, from de Gaulle’s point of view, admitting Britain into Europe was like letting a Trojan horse through the gates. He believed Europe faced a choice between pursuing its original goal of a deep integration of the original six members and opting for a larger, looser association that included Britain. A larger and looser Europe, he believed, would be a weaker Europe. It would be unable to develop into a true world power that could face Russia and the U.S. as an equal.
Today de Gaulle looks like a prophet. EU membership has left Britain miserable and divided. The rest of the 28-member EU is overextended, stressed and geopolitically weak.
To be sure, the case against Brexit is clear. Britain’s economic interests are deeply tied to Europe because of geography and because for almost half a century it has been part of the union. Leaving will be costly, and the more complete the break, the more costly the split. A no-deal Brexit in which the U.K. leaves the EU without new trade and investment agreements would be the economic equivalent of the Dunkirk evacuation, when the British army escaped from Europe but left all its equipment and supplies on the beach.
But is remaining in the EU an option? EU supporters like France’s President Emmanuel Macron want to strengthen European institutions. If Britain remains in the EU, it will fight centralization tooth and nail. If EU supporters succeed in strengthening the union, pro-Brexit sentiment will come roaring back. But if they fail—and the chances of failure rise if Britain remains in the union—a deadlocked EU will continue to flounder. In that case, pro-Brexit sentiment among British voters is also likely to grow.
These are exactly the problems de Gaulle foresaw in the 1960s. For Europe’s sake and for Britain’s, it is time to cut the cord. A sullen Britain in a failing EU doesn’t serve anyone’s interests; neither does an endless haggling over the logistics of divorce.
Polish Foreign Minister Jacek Czaputowicz thinks he has an answer: limiting the Irish backstop to five years. During that period, Britain and the EU would look for ways to keep the Irish border open, but there would be no permanent British commitment to a permanent backstop. It’s an idea the Irish reject, but one of the strengths of the EU is the ability of its diplomats to find compromises.
The U.S. has only a limited role to play in the Brexit endgame, but the American stake is significant. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo should ensure that America’s European allies understand that a smooth Brexit is important to Continental and Western cohesion and that proposals like Mr. Czaputowicz’s need to be explored.
Bagikan Berita Ini
Related Posts :
What brought Venezuela's economy to ruin? - Aljazeera.com- Will Turkey follow Venezuela's lead? - Washington Examiner
- U.S. Announces It Will Withdraw From Nuclear Arms Control Treaty With Russia - NPR
- Five takeaways on Trump decision to suspend nuclear treaty with Russia | TheHill - The Hill
- Here are all the treaties and agreements Trump has abandoned - CNN