Log In


Reset Password
Opinion Editorial Cartoons Op-Ed Editorials Letters to the Editor

Panic presumes that Brexit is a done deal

The news has been full of frightful, even panicked, talk of the effects of the British vote to take that nation out of the European Union – a British exit or Brexit. Much seems to presume the “Leave” vote was an abrupt end and that actual separation is a formality. More to the point, much of it is also predicated on the idea that there is nothing to be done about it.

That is not the case. England, its United Kingdom neighbors and the European Union all have options. So, too, do other EU members. Few of those options are attractive and some are downright dangerous, but together, they offer hope that cooler heads can find a rational solution.

From British leaders’ points of view, the simplest would be to just say “no.” The referendum on leaving is not legally binding and Parliament could ignore it. In addition, the separation process does not begin until the prime minister officially invokes Article 50 of the EU’s governing treaty. He could put that letter in a drawer.

The problem with that is that more than 17 million Brits voted to leave the EU. Many already feel betrayed by globalization, immigration and the EU’s aloof bureaucracy.

A piece in the New York Times outlines that option and three others by way of which Britain could avoid a complete break with the EU. In one, Britain could become more like Norway, a non-member of the EU that still enjoys free trade and open borders. That could give Britain more control over immigration, but at the cost of losing any say in EU governance.

There is also the idea of a Scottish veto. A House of Lords report in April said that for the United Kingdom to leave the EU would require an affirmative vote by the parliaments of Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Wales and Northern Ireland may support leaving, but Scotland voted to remain – led by the party in control of its parliament.

The problem there is that the next parliamentary election in England could undo the whole scheme by electing members who would vote to change the law that requires the other parliaments’ votes.

A better option may be a do-over. An online petition calling for a second vote had 3.8 million signatures by Monday, and some who voted for leaving have since expressed remorse.

It is unknown, however, how many voted for leaving as a protest thinking it would never pass. Most probably honestly favored leaving.

To justify a do-over, British politicians would probably have to secure some concessions from the EU, most likely on immigration. Lengthy negotiations could give them time for an extended campaign to show opponents that the drawbacks of leaving the EU are real and consequential.

But EU leaders, who may not appreciate being, in effect, threatened, might not go along. They would also have their eyes on other EU states with similar issues. There is already talk of Frexit and Czexit.

The underlying issues driving Brexit are real and important. But there is also something of a tantrum in this, both in Britain and the EU. With time and some honest, quiet diplomacy – rooted in respect for legitimate grievances – much of this could well blow over. For Britain actually to leave the EU would help no one.



Reader Comments