Round The World
New
Delhi, 6 July 2016
Britain-EU Divorce
KNIFE-EDGED
REFERENDUM
By Amrita Banerjee
(School of International Studies,
JNU, New Delhi)
The high voltage June 23rd
referendum which decided Britain’s
fate vis-à-vis existence in the
European Union was ‘one of the most divisive and bitter political campaigns
that ever waged’ in its history and made it quit EU after 43 years of
membership.
The exceedingly explosive Bremain vs Brexit campaigns before the
referendum not only unleashed ‘dark forces’ whereby many saw Labour MP Jo Cox’s
murder as an outcome of the ensuing toxicity but also divided the country down
the middle: Institutions, Parties, families and individuals in two minds on
which way to vote.
Despite the millions of pounds spent
on leaflets and other campaign material filled with figures, facts and expert
advice by the Remain and Leave sides not many were convinced either way.
However, one message which came
through amid the acrimonious din was that the referendum was important and went
to the heart of what Britain
was and what it wanted to be: A big fish in a big pond or a ‘tiddler in the
ocean’.
Undeniably, Britain already
had a special place in EU: It was not part of Schengen, out of Eurozone and
enjoyed other benefits of membership, like free movement of goods, services,
capital and workers.
But, it’s uneasiness in the 28
member States group stemmed from its harsh economic prescriptions in Greece and
Portugal, its policies on immigration, widespread perception that the EU is
controlled by Germany, its response to the 2008 recession and to the increasing
primacy of its laws diminishing national sovereignty.
Besides, after adopting a ‘Remain in
EU’ position, the David Cameroon Government
churned out a series of studies and projections loaded with Treasury figures on
how Britain has benefitted over the decades from its EU membership, and how
every Briton would be worse off out of the EU.
However, the economic cause did not
convince many. Rather one issue which connected the most with the British public was
‘uncontrolled immigration’ from within the EU which could change the face of
towns and communities and put more pressure on public services already
grappling with major funding cuts.
The ‘Leave’ campaign that gathered
52% vote on a 72% turnout sent ripple effects of this tensed and emotion-driven
referendum on several fronts. One, the campaign not only turned friends and
political allies into foes, but also led to something of a civil war within the
ruling Conservative Party. There were talks about a ‘revenge reshuffle’ had
Bremain won.
But after Britain
decided on Brexit, Cameroon
announced his unwillingness to run for the 2020 elections and declared the
Party elect his successor by October under whom a divorce between Britain and EU
would take place.
Bluntly, democracy in Britain seems
to be in doldrums and the political class seems to have imploded. The names of
Boris Johnson, the star of the Leave campaign are floating as the next UK PM. His
ambition to succeed Cameroon
was known but few thought referendum could be his route to No. 10, Downing Street.
Loved and loathed in equal measure,
Theresa May is being seen as the best ‘stop Boris’ candidate. Meanwhile, Labour
leader Jeremy Corbyn suffered a humiliating defeat. With a ‘zombie’ Government
in place and Labour and Torries in turmoil, Britain’s political woes continue.
Two, Brexit has caused a splinter in
UK
itself. This second referendum held in two years has propelled yet another call
for referendum by Scotland
as it starts its drive to protect its EU membership and prepares for possible
fresh independence vote from UK.
It has also raised questions over
Gibraltar’s future as Spain
has come forward to jointly govern it with Britain. The relationship between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland
has also come under the scanner.
Three, the climate in Britain after the
46.5 million electorate gave its decision to ditch EU, was of regret and
despondency. In fact, a petition on Parliament’s website calling for another EU
referendum was signed by more than 1.6 million people making it eligible for a
debate.
Four, EU has talked tough with
Britain and asked it to follow the procedure laid down under the Article 50 of
EU’s 2009 Lisbon treaty to leave as
quickly as possible because Britain’s domino effects were visible in other
countries like France, Slovakia and Netherlands with several European leaders
calling for similar referendums in their countries.
Moreover, EU also clarified that Britain cannot
cherry pick provisions of the treaty as it warned it of no access to single
market without migration.
Five, even though Brexiteers claimed
that Britain outside EU
promised a ‘massive boost’ to relations with India
along-with fairer and better visa system for people in herein and the
Commonwealth, New Delhi underscored it had
wanted Britain
to stay in EU as it supported British internationalism and not insularity.
However, as apprehensions regarding
the vote continued, India
kept itself insulated through the three lines of defence --- good economic
policy, plenty of reserves and phasing out maturities of foreign borrowings.
Undoubtedly, the vote outcome has
profound implications for 800 Indian companies which employ 11,0000 British
workers and operate using London and Britain as a gateway to work across Europe. There are indications that some of these might
relocate to other European capitals and Indian investments in future can get
diverted to the EU.
Secondly, the future of Goans who
opted for Portuguese citizenship and moved to Britain hangs in a limbo. Thirdly,
Indian students would find education in Britain more expensive henceforth.
Fourthly, this referendum has
created great amount of uncertainty because the outcome takes Britain into
unchartered territory where promises of a land of milk and honey outside the EU
were made during the long campaign but no one knows the path for it.
Today, London’s pre-eminent position as the capital
of global finance is under challenge with a negative rating from credit rating
agency Moody. When Britain
extricates itself after a two-year process, it will no longer benefit from
tariff free movement of goods and capital.
Further, issues such as tax laws and
immigration rules would take years to settle and British firms which sell
across Europe would have to ensure that their
products meet safety and environmental standards. In short, the many claims of Brexit benefits
would be put to severe test.
Lastly, Brexit has a distinct
fallout for Britain:
Energy infrastructure investment would be costlier, free movement of Britons
would be hindered as they would no longer enjoy visa free travel.
There is foreign policy bad news too.
Washington has declared that they would be
less interested in London
as an ally because of its perceived loss of influence.
Clearly, Britain has turned its back on John
Donne’s 16th century conception that ‘No man is an island’. Indeed,
ironic in this globalization age whereby Brexit has turned Great Britain
into ‘Little England’.
In sum, a piquant situation has
arisen for Britain similar
to wading in unchartered waters as UK stands a nation divided. It has certainly a long road to cover between
‘leave’ and ‘left’ and only the future holds the key to Britain’s sticky
situation. ---- INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|