The BREXIT referendum was ostensibly about membership of the European Union. Voters however interpreted it as a question about what kind of country do they want Britain to be? 23rd June appeared to offer a fork in the road: one path (Remain) promising it would lead British citizens to a modern world of opportunity based on interdependence; the other (Leave) was publicized as a pathway to an independent land that would respect tradition and heritage. The evolving scenario within the disunited United Kingdom however continues to change every hour. Unfortunately, this dynamics is making the issue at hand more complex. Disunited Britain moves away from European unity
The referendum may have answered one question, but it has also raised many other questions. At the end of the referendum, Britain finds itself dealing with an existential crisis
Muhammad Zamir
The BREXIT referendum was ostensibly about membership of the European Union. Voters however interpreted it as a question about what kind of country do they want Britain to be? 23rd June appeared to offer a fork in the road: one path (Remain) promising it would lead British citizens to a modern world of opportunity based on interdependence; the other (Leave) was publicized as a pathway to an independent land that would respect tradition and heritage. The evolving scenario within the disunited United Kingdom however continues to change every hour. Unfortunately, this dynamics is making the issue at hand more complex.
The referendum turnout was 71.8 per cent - with more than 30 million people voting - the highest turnout at a UK-wide vote since 1992. 17.4 million cast their votes to Leave (51.9 per cent) while 16.1 million voted to Remain (48.1 per cent) in the European Union. Within this matrix, voters from London, Scotland and Northern Ireland backed staying in. Wales and the rest of England voted by more than 50 per cent to leave the EU. Remains defeat seems to have been primarily the product of the decisions made by voters living north of the M4 English Highway. United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) leader Nigel Farage immediately hailed the result as being the UKs independence day. On the other side there has been the comment of Scotlands First Minister Nicola Sturgeon who has drawn attention to the fact that the EU vote makes clear that the people of Scotland see their future as part of the European Union as all 32 local authority areas in Scotland had returned majorities for Remain.
The immediate consequence was Prime Minister David Cameron announcing on 24th June, the day after the referendum that he was going to step down by this October. In a statement delivered outside Downing Street in the presence of his wife Samantha, he said that he would attempt to steady the ship over the coming weeks and months but that fresh leadership was needed. It may be recalled here that Cameron had played the leading role in urging his country to vote Remain. His decision was based on the fact that the next step will require the British Head of Government to move forward towards the eventual formal separation and withdrawal of the UK from the EU. This will require the carrying out of negotiations with the EU and the invoking of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which gives the UK two years to negotiate its withdrawal.
The referendum may have answered one question, but it has also raised many other questions. At the end of the referendum, Britain finds itself dealing with an existential crisis. With Scotland voting overall to remain, and a similar picture in Northern Ireland, there will now be powerful pressures upon the fabric of the UK. Mark Easton has correctly pointed out that the EU referendum has revealed an ancient, jagged fault line across the United Kingdom. He has described this as a scar that has sliced through conventional politics and traditional social structures, and underlined the disunity that exists within a Kingdom and whether it can still call itself United. The Scots will be asking themselves some serious questions about how their best interests are now served. Similar conversations will take place in parts of Northern Ireland. For many English voters, this was an opportunity to wave their flag of St George, restore a sense of their national pride. This is being interpreted by most people in Scotland as a vote for English nationalism. The electronic media has also highlighted how in most parts of Britain the vote was seen as a way to stop foreigners and foreign ways changing the character of neighborhoods and communities. The rural/urban divide was also matched by a generational divide- younger people largely supporting Remain because of their appreciation for modernity and the embracing of difference and the older citizens largely supported Leave because they are more comfortable with what is familiar and are less at ease with change.
Britains break with the EU will not be straightforward or swift. The disappointments of a messy Brexit, the concessions and compromises that real politics will demand, will test the system of governance of both the United Kingdom as well as that of the European Union.
Section (1) of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty states that any member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements. Section (2) points out that the Member State shall inform the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament. This will include the draft deal being placed in front of the remaining 27 member States of the EU. It will also need the approval from at least 20 countries with 65 per cent of the total population of the EU. These stipulations suggest that quitting the EU is not an automatic process - it has to be negotiated with the remaining members. These negotiations are meant to be completed within two years. In this context it also has to be remembered that the European Parliament has a veto over any new agreement formalizing the relationship between the UK and the EU.
When the whole process is over, the UK Parliament will have to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act and replace it with the new Agreement.
It may be noted here that once Article 50 has been triggered a country cannot rejoin without the consent of all member states. Boris Johnson and Michael Gove who led the campaign to get Britain out of the EU have suggested to Cameron that Britain should not rush to the invoking of Article 50 but give priority attention to - curbing the power of EU judges and limiting the free movement of workers. They also want the government to work out (on a parallel basis, after invoking Article- 50) an agreed strategy with regard to the negotiation of its future trading relationship with the EU and fixing trade deals with non-EU countries. This has been seen as a hint for the need to have a cross-party national negotiating committee to the unstitching the UK from more than 40 years of EU law and deciding which directives and regulations to amend or discard from among 80,000 pages.
This prospective state of affairs has however become quite multifaceted with the emerging scenario within the Conservative Party and the Labour Party. The Conservatives will have to agree on the successor of Cameron. So far, no-one has formally thrown their hat into the ring but Home Secretary Theresa May and former London Mayor Boris Johnson are likely contenders. Similarly, within the Labour Party, moves are afoot to replace their current leader- Jeremy Corbyn for his lukewarm campaign. Some senior members of his shadow Cabinet have already resigned from their positions. However Corbyn has however affirmed that he will stand in any new party leadership election. There is also the anticipation that, due to Camerons impending resignation, there might be an early snap general election. The Scottish suggestion that they might go for a second independence referendum to determine whether they want to stay in the United Kingdom has also created its own anxiety.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel has expressed great regret and has joined French President Francois Hollande on the need to handle the fallout from BREXIT carefully and to avoid the risk of divisions, dissensions and quarrels. Leaders of Eurosceptic parties in France (Frexit), the Netherlands (Nexit) and Italy (Italeave) have also quickly demanded referendums in their own countries to sensitize their dissatisfaction with the EU process and its dysfunctional institutions
EU head Jean-Claude Juncker has interestingly mentioned that the BREXIT vote was not an amicable divorce, but as Britons want to leave the European Union, so it doesnt make any sense to wait until October to try to negotiate the terms of their departure - I would like to get started immediately. This might not however be possible given the multifaceted developments taking place within the British strategic political and financial matrix and its connotations for the global economy.
Global stock markets fell heavily on the news of Brexit and the value of the British Pound also fell dramatically. According to Reuters world stocks saw more than US $ 2 trillion wiped off. The Pound fell against the US Dollar to 1.32, lowest since 1985, and the Euro gained to stand at 1.2145 against Sterling. The UK has also had its credit rating outlook downgraded to negative by the ratings agency Moody. It has asserted that the referendum result would have negative implications for the countrys medium-term growth outlook, and has consequently lowered the UKs long term debt ratings to negative from stable. Moody has also pointed out that there will be a prolonged period of uncertainty and that this negative effect from lower economic growth will outweigh the fiscal savings from the UK no longer having to contribute to the EU budget.
The stunning prospect of Britain leaving the EU is also expected to cast a long shadow on Bangladeshs economy both in terms of trade as well as in the context of the value of remittance received from that country. Apparel manufacturers and entrepreneurs associated in exporting fresh vegetable, fruit and fish from Bangladesh to the United Kingdom are now looking at the prospect of being unable to use the Everything but Arms Regulation that enables us to export all our produce to the EU duty-free and quota-free. That will make our items less competitive in the new UK market.
Similarly, remittance received from Britain is likely to suffer further as the Pound Sterling is expected to remain devalued against the US Dollar and the Taka in the immediate future. This will be particularly unwelcome because there has already been a gradual reduction in remittance in US Dollar terms from Britain over the last five years- US$ 987.46 million in FY-2012 to US $ 812.34 million in FY-2015. This FY- 2016 (till May) it has been only US $ 758.62 million. It is therefore satisfying to note in this regard that the relevant agencies and authorities of the government are taking steps to carefully evaluate the over-all impact of the post-BREXIT scenario. They also need to seek suggestions from representatives of the civil society, the private sector and other relevant stake-holders.
BREXIT will impact on globalization in general as well as Britains new emerging relationship with the rest of the world, within the ambit of the WTO and its strategic partnership with developing countries. One can only hope that reason instead of prejudice and anger will guide its future courses of action.
Muhammad Zamir, a former ambassador, is an analyst specialised in foreign affairs, right to information and good governance. He can be reached at [email protected]
