Britain has a new prime minister — but its post-EU future remains uncertain. Indeed, prolonged delays are likely in implementing the voters’ decision to leave the EU.
The first uncertainty is the date when exit negotiations will start. The process should be completed within two years of invoking Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon; but British Prime Minister Theresa May has already said she would not want to trigger negotiations until the end of the year.
The second uncertainty is whether the negotiations can simultaneously resolve Britain’s terms of exit from the EU and its future trading arrangements with Europe’s single market. While Britain will claim that, under Article 50, negotiators should be “taking into account the framework of future relationships,” the EU trade negotiator is insisting that future arrangements can only be discussed after Britain leaves.
The third uncertainty is Britain’s negotiating objectives. Will it seek full access to the single market (the Norwegian option), or to part of it (the Swiss option)? Or will it go for the Canadian low-tariff option, or just trade with Europe on the same terms that all WTO members do?
The fourth uncertainty arises from voters’ concerns over immigration and the extent to which any new EU trading arrangement must be conditional on restricting the free movement of workers. The new prime minister has said she would not accept engagement in the single market without a deal on managing immigration.
In theory, the Norway option — membership of the European Economic Area (EEA) — could be stretched to include a Lichtenstein-type protocol on limiting residency permits, or involve the use of the EEA’s safeguard clause, which might allow restrictions on immigration if inflows rose too quickly, but fearful that others would demand similar dispensation, the EU would find it difficult to agree to such a change.
The fifth uncertainty is the EU’s own negotiating stance, starting with who will lead the negotiations, the European Commission or the Council of Ministers.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel has already made it clear that she will not give the commission carte blanche to negotiate on Germany’s behalf.
Beyond this question lies another — whether Europe will agree on its final negotiating stance before France’s presidential election in spring next year and Germany’s general election in the fall.
The sixth uncertainty is the economic circumstances under which the negotiations will take place.
Britain appears to be sliding toward recession as companies put their investment plans on hold. Business pressure on the British government to move more quickly will therefore grow, as a longer wait means a further ebbing of confidence and, in turn, a weakening of Britain’s bargaining position.
NATION’S SURVIVAL
The seventh uncertainty is whether Britain itself can survive.
Lord North is remembered for losing the union with the US. Two centuries on, former British prime minister David Cameron might be remembered for losing two unions — the one with Europe, and between England and Scotland.
Whereas Conservatives want Scotland to be in a Britain without Europe, Scottish nationalists want Scotland in a Europe without Britain, and with Northern Ireland’s Republicans, led by Sinn Fein, demanding a vote to reunite with the south, the very existence of the UK is now squarely on the agenda.
There is one way to lessen uncertainty and risk: The government should quickly announce that it will be negotiating with the EU on the basis of the Norway option of membership of the EEA and it should make clear that EU nationals resident in the UK are welcome to stay.
This avenue would give Britain what businesses want — access to the single market. While the nation would still have to contribute to the EU budget, it could repatriate responsibility for agriculture and fisheries policies, and negotiate its own trade deals (for example with China and India). Joining the EEA would offer an additional advantage — giving Scotland the level playing field it wants in trading with the 27 EU members.
It is also essential to resolve the vexed issue of immigration.
Any genuine solution must include a fund to help communities whose health facilities, schools and other public services are under stress because of above-average population growth. Tougher enforcement of minimum-wage and other legislation protecting workers is needed as well, so that we allay fears that immigrants are forcing a race to the bottom, and the EEA negotiations should begin on the basis that Britain’s membership would include a protocol on immigration and the ability to use the safeguard clause if pressures grow.
An eighth and even greater uncertainty, though, concerns Britain’s future global role.
In particular, how will it respond to the irreversible shift in the global economy’s center of gravity toward Asia, and to the technological innovations that are revolutionizing industries and occupations — and therefore increasing voters’ anxieties about their employment prospects and future livelihoods?
The referendum result revealed high concentrations of “pro-Brexit” sentiment in towns once at the center of the British industrial revolution, but now awash with derelict factories and workshops, owing to Asian competition.
These areas rebelled against the advice of the political and business elites to vote “Remain,” and instead demanded protection from the vicissitudes of global change.
The “Leave” campaign’s very slogans — centered on bringing control back home — aligned it with populist, protectionist movements that are fracturing old political loyalties throughout the West.
The result has exposed a Labour Party divided between a leadership that elevates anti-globalization protests above winning power and a parliamentary group that knows it has to explain how globalization can be managed in the public interest.
However, the governing Conservatives are also split on how to respond to globalization.
Some believe in a global free-for-all; others that Britain should be free of foreign entanglements; and a third cohort wants, like Labour, to be part of the EU, viewing it not as the problem, but as part of the solution to managing globalization.
NEED FOR DEBATE
Because of these divisions, none of the leadership contenders put forward any proposals that address in any meaningful way the grievances of those who feel left behind.
So post-referendum Britain needs a more comprehensive debate on how it will cope with the challenges of global change and how it will work with the international community to do so.
A viable program for managing globalization would recognize that every nation must balance the autonomy it desires with the cooperation it needs. This would include coordinated monetary and fiscal policies across the G20 nations; renewed efforts to expand world trade; new national agendas addressing inequality and promoting social mobility; and a laser-like focus on science, technology and innovation as the key to future growth.
As long as globalization appears leaderless, anti-globalization protesters will stifle reform, shout down proposed trade deals such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and make national economies less open.
Now facing life outside the EU, Britain cannot ignore or sidestep these global issues. It must now decide whether it will stand up to the protectionist impulse that drove “Brexit” and what part it can play in making globalization work for all.
Gordon Brown, former British prime minister and chancellor of the exchequer, is UN special envoy for global education and chair of the International Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations