Personal Research: Europe After Brexit

Introduction

Every day, we are bombarded with the news about different terms of negotiations between the United Kingdom and the European Union. For the already ex-member of the ‘single market’, this decision was historical and definitely hard one to make. The difference between those who were in favor or against was just 3. 8% percent. This shows that in today’s globalized world, the British are ‘the Europeans’, the Brits who could exercise their right to travel, to study or to work across the whole EU. For those Brits who were born in the 70’s, the life of the UK in the EU was the only life they knew. This can be also explained if we look at the age background of those who voted in favor of staying in the EU. These population groups were in particular from 18 to 44 years old. The 73% of the age group from 18 to 24 and the 62% of those aged from 25 to 34 voted to stay in the European Union. Consequently, these people represent the British born in the EU era, who cannot envisage their lives differently. According to the date of the Full fact (the UK’s independent fact checking charity), 1. 3 million of the Brits live in Europe and who now will be forced to make life-changing decisions: leave their jobs, move and start their lives over. Nonetheless, the focus of my essay will be what it would mean for Europe losing one of its powerful member state and “second largest economy”. This essay will give us a quick glance on the UK-EU relations and will present the opportunities and threats for Europe caused by Brexit.

According to the economic integration model by Balassa (1967), The EU places itself on the 6th degree out of 7 which is the Economic and monetary Union. The title I of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides deeper insight on what are the competences of what both the Union and Member States and from there we can clearly see that definitely cooperation within the Member States of the EU goes far beyond purely economic questions. However, the United Kingdom has always had special relationship with the EU. The reluctant attitude of the British towards full integration had always been noticed in particular matters. The British never wanted to abolish their borders and change their currency. For this reason, they were not part of ‘the Eurozone’ and ‘the Shengen agreement’. When in 2016, the referendum finally decides to withdraw from the Union, one of the main reasons was the immigration issue according to Teresa May, the Prime-Minister of the United Kingdom.

Opportunities and threats for Europe

What happened is already happened and the main question which arises in this context is where the European Union will benefit or suffer losing one of its biggest member states. Firstly, we start our discourse with listing the potential opportunities which will be then followed by the potential threats.

Regardless of obvious disappointment for the EU on the UK’s decision to leave, they still try to see it as a positive phenomenon, because Britain was not very cooperative as a member state. It “blocked” many EU projects and stopped the EU from “integration” and “didn’t want to be on board in a lot of areas”. Therefore, one of the positive outcomes for Brussels’ office would be to expand EU to new borders, bringing the new members in, in other terms “push forward further integration”. The cooperation with US can be improved as well in the frame of further integration matters. In addition to that, the UK cannot just leave the EU easily and without any sacrifice. The UK will have to pay to the EU the exit bill which costs 60 billion Euros. This is what they call a “divorce bill”. In her turn, Teresa May is very eager to try and discuss a Free Trade Agreement to keep the trade going on between the EU and the UK and, thus, maintain mutually beneficial relations which ones brought them together in one union.

Talking about potential threats, here we have more aspects to consider. What Britain meant for EU could be described as follows: the Brits made one eighth of the EU population; it was the largest military power within the Union; it possessed nuclear weapon; it is a veto-wielding member in the United Nations Security Council; it constitutes one fourth of European Global Development Finance (GDF) and, thus, being second largest economy of the common market. What's more, O’Leary (2018) reports that 3. 7 million of EU nationals currently live in Britain which is almost 3 times more than the number of Brits in Europe. Therefore, with the Brexit, ‘the Brexodus’ will also take place which refers to the mass exit of EU individuals and corporations from the United Kingdom.

Finally, the British leave the Union at the time of its almost worst. With the refugee influx and the crisis that followed it, the clear division was established across the EU member states that only spiced up the tensions and make certain states to reconsider its membership in the EU and to follow the Brexit’s example. This is referred as “the domino effect”. The Value of the EU now is being questioned due to its incapacity of handling different issues of its member states and not taking into the account the interests and the integrity of its nations. Therefore, the leaders of ‘survived’ large member states who still believe in European unity and sovereignty must reconsider its policies especially within the immigration and economic domains. Hence, the Union must reassure itself and represent the national interests of its members, instead of dictating its own terms and imposing them on the countries who hoped for the EU project and their prosperity rather than now being victims of it.

Conclusion

This demarche is definitely a lesson to learn for the European Union. Losing one of its strongest members will hit Europe very hard for sure. However, looking considering opportunities and threats, the hope is still there under certain conditions though. The Union’s values should drive the remaining Member States to work as close as possible to avoid possible negative effects that Brexit may have on the EU. The European Union should be the Union that makes the European movement only stronger and exemplary and helps its member states in prosperity and reassures the quality of life for its citizens. Robert Schuman, a founding father of European Integration, had a great vision for European cooperation and the unity after “the devastation” brought by World War II by creating European Coal and Steel Community. This project evolved from this small community to the Union of 27 countries during 68 years that it already exists. This is a clear indicator that the vision of its founding father wasn’t wrong and for this reason the community grew to such the Union of so many European nations. Now, its member states need to demonstrate their unity and cooperation more than ever to reaffirm the EU world position and demonstrate its power.

Pro-European President of France, Emmanuel Macron in his recent speech encourages its EU partners to the founding visionary ideas that shaped EU, like the one of the Robert Schuman. He definitely does not want Europe to collapse because of “anti-immigrant nationalism and fragmentation”.