Britain’s Brexit Problem
In the wake of British Prime Minister Theresa May’s disastrous speech on the final day of this year’s Conservative Party Conference, Brexit looks less like a mandate for a strong governing coalition to execute the will of the people and more like a vague campaign slogan: “More than a year on from the Brexit referendum, the meaning of the result—both why it happened and where it will lead—is as unclear as it is non-negotiable. Politicians and journalists have tried in vain to interpret Brexit, labelling it, among other things, a ‘working-class revolt,’ a working-class ‘tantrum’ (as the current Europe minister diagnosed it at the conference), an ‘English revolt,’ a ‘free-market revolution,’ a ‘victory for real, ordinary people’ and a corruption of democracy by a small, scheming elite. All these readings contain kernels of truth: ‘Brexit’ was a blank canvas onto which a people projected their personal fantasies, fears, and fury. But Brexit cannot appease them all.
“Undeterred, May plows ahead with her messianic quest to carry out the ‘will of the British people’—the 26 percent of the population, that is, that voted to leave the EU for a vast array of reasons, a slice of the country that seems larger thanks to a vociferous tabloid press. But May and her party, as if held hostage to some higher force, seem increasingly uncertain as to where it will lead. A Jeremy Corbyn prime ministership looks more likely with every passing week, but a ‘glorious Brexit,’ a ‘red-white-and-blue Brexit,’ a ‘hard Brexit,’ a ‘soft Brexit,’ a ‘clean Brexit,’ a ‘jobs-first Brexit’ and even the mythical ‘no-deal Brexit’ all remain in the cards. For now, her infamous tautology, ‘Brexit means Brexit’ is the only helpful guide: Britain has agreed to do something, even if it doesn’t know what. By golly, it will.
“On September 22, May appeared in Florence to deliver a reconciliatory speech outlining what Brexit might mean. Confirming the impossibility of the task ahead, her vague appeasements only angered all sides. Through 50 monotonous minutes, the single clear step she took was to ask the EU for a two-year extension to Britain’s single-market membership—with a disconcerting assurance ‘that this will not go on forever.’ The proposed transition period would follow Britain’s expected exit from the EU on March 29, 2019. The EU was not impressed: ‘Today’s speech does not clarify how the UK intends to honour its special responsibility for the consequences of its withdrawal for Ireland,’ Michael Barnier, the European Chief Negotiator for Brexit, remarked. Until this clarification comes—along with progress on the two other stumbling blocks, the rights of EU citizens and financial settlements—the EU insists that no post-Brexit arrangement is possible.
“This transition period reveals starker fault lines within British society. For those that voted Leave, the prospect of postponing Britain’s independence to 2021—a full five years after the referendum—is a devastating delay. For certain Tories, it is also an unacceptable one: resurrected calls for a ‘no-deal Brexit’ (somehow leaving the EU absent negotiations or settlements) were greeted with applause at the Conservative conference, and [Boris] Johnson has used the unpopularity of the extension period to vaunt his own prime-ministerial credentials, contra May.”
Although the actual process of Brexit is still unclear, it’s also true that Brexit was a stark rejection of Britain’s political leadership. Who knows what that will eventually look like vis-à-vis the EU, but British leaders are going to have to figure out what it means domestically, and right now it doesn’t seem like May and her Conservative Party have any idea.
|