Why the looming Brexit deadline is disadvantageous
I can feel spring in the air. The clocks have been pushed forward, the daffodils are starting to bloom and the United Kingdom (UK) is dealing with a quite a bit of political turmoil.
That’s right, three years into the debate, Brexit continues to plague the political climate in Europe, and it has only gotten more confusing since March has rolled around.
As of now, the UK is set to leave the European Union (EU) on March 29, but the sovereign country still has the opportunity to delay their leave up until that deadline.
However, it’s a complex decision with no clear answer whatsoever as to where the UK will be by March 29 in light of the recent votes within the House of Commons.
According to The New York Times, “Britain’s Parliament on Tuesday soundly defeated Prime Minister Theresa May’s plan to exit the European Union, a 391 to 242 vote that is likely to delay Brexit and could derail it entirely.”
However, according to the Economist, leaving the EU by the March 29 deadline “is now extremely unlikely to happen. Immediately after the [March 12] vote…Mrs. May said that the government would now ask the Commons if it wanted to leave the EU with no deal at all. And if the answer was no, it would then invite [Members of Parliament] to vote on whether to seek an extension.”
The house voted once again on March 13 in order to decide whether or not to leave the EU with or without a deal. They voted to withdraw on March 29 as planned, but with no deal in place with the EU.
So, the big question is, what is the UK going to do in the end?
I can’t pretend like I know what the House of Commons or the EU is going to do. Typically countries want to join the EU, not leave it.
However, I do believe that the EU is a beneficial institution. For a solid portion of the 20th century, Western Europe was in two horrific wars. Now, the institution continues to do a good job of consolidating democracy and peace rather than foster war.
I see the EU as a beneficial outcome of globalization and an a major stabilizing factor within a region that has had quite a background of violence. It is an institution that aims to ensure open travel, sustain a stable internal market, consolidate a fair rule of law among all of the participating states and promote democracy and basic human rights.
Like any institution, it has its flaws. It is by no means perfect nor accepted by every citizen within its jurisdiction, hence the debate in the UK. But the countries in Europe have seen more benefits than drawbacks from the EU’s policies.
Having democratic institutions in place that take into consideration the well-being of various actors is a step in the right direction towards global cooperation and peace.
Not to mention that these collaborative governmental institutions are inevitable in the face of globalization. Although independent sovereignty and isolationist policies are growing global trends, it is not sustainable in the long run considering the prevalence of supranational interactions.
With this in mind and regardless of the likelihood of the possible outcome in the House of Commons, I don’t think it would be beneficial for the UK to leave the EU. If the answer to leave was so clear-cut, wouldn’t you think the UK would have left by now?
Clearly many citizens have qualms with leaving, and the level of uncertainty is apparent. I don’t think the frustration over the debate is worth the outcome.
If the UK does in fact pull out of the EU on March 29 without a deal, all I can see in the forecast for European politics are issues between the UK and the rest of the region.
Isolation is not beneficial for any actors involved, and the best bet for the UK would be to remain a strong actor within an institution that promotes democracy and cooperation over solitude.
“UK-first” is not a surprising or original idea. Have you heard the rhetoric in the our own country? This mindset is nothing new, but it’s not a positive development for politics in any nation.
In a previous piece about the nature of the 2020 U.S. presidential elections, I stressed cooperation and pragmatism. I think that same lesson applies to the situation in the UK.
Cooperation with other European states is unavoidable in the face of globalization. The world is at a remarkable level of interconnection between states, and the best thing for all countries to do is to adapt and make the best of that change.
A state can benefit its own citizens’ lives while still working with other countries. The ability to compromise and work with others on a global stage is a sign of a truly strong state. Deciding to pretend that a nation is better off alone is more so a sign of blatant denial of the world that we are living in.
