Britain’s identity crisis and global disorder

S P SETH

The British referendum to leave the European Union (EU) will not only affect the United Kingdom but is likely to have wider repercussions. Some of its supporters were jubilant calling it Britain’s independence day by freeing the country from EU’s institutional and bureaucratic stranglehold. For 17 million Brits voting to quit EU—though about 16 million voted to remain in the EU--- it is democracy at work. However, a good number are said to be regretting their decision. But the die is cast and the process of separation will take its due course.

There has indeed been an attempt by some Brexit supporters and promoters to put the best spin on their decision, suggesting that nothing much will change in terms of Britain’s relationship with Europe. Here is Boris Johnson, who led the charge against EU membership, disingenuously saying in a newspaper article, “I cannot stress too much that Britain is part of Europe, and always will be. There will still be intense and intensifying European co-operation and partnership in a large number of fields… EU citizens living in this country will have their rights fully protected, and the same goes for British citizens living in EU.” In a subsequent article in the Telegraph, London, he again suggested that things would remain, more or less, the same while allowing Britain to recover its sovereignty. He wrote this article a few days after announcing that he had withdrawn from the contest for David Cameron’s position, which threw the ruling Conservative Party into considerable confusion, if not chaos.  

Of course, there will be no immediate change until the divorce begins when Britain invokes Article 50 of the relevant treaty that sets forth the process of withdrawal. Incidentally, this provision hasn’t been used before. And once invoked, the process of withdrawal is set to take two years. In other words, once the separation is effected, it will mean that Britain will be like any other non-member country, with its new relationship negotiated separately. It will no longer be an insider with free access to, for instance, the EU single EU market. In Britain, there is a sense among some “Leave” proponents that all the loose ends, requiring renegotiation over a whole range of issues, might be sorted out in the period between now and the 2-year exit period thus putting the new relationship on a smooth bed as if nothing much has happened. It is like a divorce where the aggrieved former partners still carry on, though not in the same house. That is not how life works.

In his article in the Telegraph, London, before he decided to abandon his bid for leadership, Johnson mentioned two reasons for Brexit. These were: “… the No. 1 issue was control--- a sense that British democracy was being undermined by the EU system, and that we should restore to the people that vital power…” Second: “I believe that millions of people who voted ‘Leave’ were also inspired by the belief that Britain is a great country, and that outside the job-destroying coils of EU bureaucracy we can survive and thrive as never before.” He didn’t believe that immigration was a big issue.

Apart from Johnson, virtually every commentator highlighted anxieties about immigration as an important factor contributing to the ‘Leave’ vote.  And it wasn’t focused on Asian, Caribbean and Middle Eastern immigrants, though the racist abuse, affecting all minorities, has gone up since the referendum. . This time, though, the main focus of ‘Leave’ voters’ anger was European immigrants, like Poles and Romanians and from other EU member countries, who are free to enter, live and work anywhere in the regional union. In other words, it was a mix of issues--- a general sense of anxiety and fear that Britain was losing control of its affairs to the bureaucrats at the EU headquarters in Brussels. And a hope that once Britain was back with its sovereign control, its old spirit of adventure and enterprise would come into play and everything in the country would be so much better. This sense of a special, even exceptional, British enterprise is part of a deeply embedded nostalgia for the past when Britannia ruled the waves, as was once so proudly proclaimed.

But the reality is slowly dawning that leaving EU might not be the hoped for solution. To begin with, it has created political turmoil in the country. David Cameron has resigned and the contest for his position has further polarized the party. The lead conservative politician in the Brexit camp, Boris Johnson, has become a casualty of his success, and has announced that he wouldn’t be in the race as David Cameron’s successor. The market volatility following the Brexit decision belied Johnson’s contention that nothing much would change.  The economic consequences would continue to be felt over a period of time.

The immediate effect, for instance, has been the downgrading of the United Kingdom’s credit rating by global credit agencies. And there are fears that Britain might be headed for recession. It is likely to affect investments, create unemployment, and a possible downgrading of London as a major global financial hub. And indeed, this might have spill over effects for European economies as well by creating a general sense of economic uncertainty at a time when the recovery from the 2008-9 recession is still fragile or stagnant.

And at another level, the Brexit might set in motion a process of EU fragmentation by encouraging demand for popular referendum in other EU countries. As in Britain, there has been a growing populist reaction against EU as a symbol of all that is wrong, like the infringement of national sovereignty, increased unemployment, rapidly falling economic standards attributed to enforced austerity programs, out of control refugee and immigration problems and so on.  And all this is more oxygen for rightwing and fascist parties helping them to come to power, as in Poland and Hungary, as well as making a serious bid for power in some other member countries, like France, Holland and so on.

If EU’s fragmentation were to take hold, it could spell the end of the post-WW11 international system based on US-led western world. It is worth remembering that Britain was a leading allied power that defeated Nazi Germany and, besides being a permanent member of the UN Security Council, it has been and is an important member/part of the international institutions that underpin global order. And its importance has tended to be more than its weight because of the special relationship with the United States. In some ways, the United Kingdom often looked like a projection of the US strategic posture into Europe and elsewhere in the world. While the US and EU are close allies and part of NATO, Britain was special. And to that extent, its exit from EU is likely to diminish its importance with the EU, the US, and the world at large. It was already a power of the past and now by retreating into its island status, it would increasingly be consigned to that role.

Britain’s identity crisis and global disorder--- Part 2

S P SETH

The 27-member EU (without Britain) is making it clear that Britain is not going to have any special deal with the EU after it has exited. There would be no concessional access to the EU’s large single market without the accepted four freedoms: that its members abide by the free movement of labour, goods, capital and services. At the same time, London’s status as the financial hub of the EU is under threat. Germany’s financial market regulator reportedly said that London could not host the headquarters of a planned European stock exchange and could not remain a centre for trading in euros after it has left the EU. This would down grade London’s status as a global centre in all sorts of ways--- politically, economically, and strategically. The anticipated negative effects will take time to filter through but, over time, the United Kingdom will be the loser.

At home, the Brexit referendum has thrown the country’s politics into turmoil. Which is seen at two levels. First: instead of clarifying the situation within the ruling Conservative Party after a fairly convincing vote to quit EU, it was thrown into chaos with the Justice Secretary, Michael Gove, a close ally of the lead campaigner Boris Johnson, turning on him and declaring his own candidacy for prime minister’s job. Whoever comes on top and takes over David Cameron’s job will have a difficult task of uniting the party, not to speak of the country--- nearly half of which voted to stay in the EU. While the Conservative Party is working its way through its leadership crisis, the Labour Party is in all sorts of strife with its parliamentary wing resoundingly declaring a vote of no confidence in their leader, Jeremy Corbyn. However, Corbyn is refusing to go as he was elected by the rank and file membership of the Labour Party. He will probably have to go eventually because a Labour Party so hopelessly divided, is likely to be decimated in the next election.

Of course, the politics of the country might settle down over time but Brexit referendum has created overall uncertainty about the future. With Scottish voters having overwhelming voted to ‘Remain’ in the EU, it further complicates British polity. The Scottish First Minister met some of the EU leaders to canvass its case to remain as part of the EU. But that is not likely, as Scotland is part the United Kingdom and hence not able to exercise sovereign rights. Therefore, the only way for them to exercise the EU option would be to separate from the UK through another popular referendum that London might or might not allow so soon after the recent one that failed. The Brexit might also create problems with Northern Ireland, with its compatriots across the Irish border a part of the EU. The eventual solution might be a hastened union between the two parts of Ireland—north and south. In other words, it is a tangled world in the UK where its two parts, Scotland and Northern Ireland, would rather quit Britain to remain within the EU.  

Another aspect of the Brexit referendum, which I have already touched briefly, is how it might impact the European Union project, which has kept the feuding and warring Europeans from lunging at each other, as in WW1 and WW11. Coming in the wake of Europe’s still unresolved financial crisis--- with Greece at one time in danger of either quitting or forced to exit the euro zone and some other member countries facing their own moments of debt overload and forced into austerity regimes with mounting unemployment and social distress--- Britain’s decision to quit might start a process of unraveling over a period of time. Some of the issues that propelled British referendum are a matter of concern for some of its other members as well. The issue of loss of sovereignty is a serious concern with some countries, especially smaller countries, which feel that Germany and France, particularly Germany, tend to dominate through the pan-European institutions based in Brussels. Germany’s dominance was seriously resented in Greece, and in other countries forced into austerity regimes. The anti-EU constituency, strongly associated with extreme right and ultra nationalist parties, is quite influential in France and Netherlands and becoming stronger elsewhere. In Poland and Hungry, their right-wing, if not fascist regimes, also resent the human rights elements of the EU project.  

These powerful extreme nationalist forces have been strengthened further by the influx of refugees from the Middle East due to civil wars made worse by the so-called IS caliphate in parts of Iraq and Syria. Those voting for Brexit also feared, as part of their collective multiple neurosis, that Britain’s membership of the EU would make it further lose control of its national borders by letting in more refugees/immigrants into the country. Britain is suffering from an identity crisis and has been since it lost the empire. The referendum has tended to provide an outlet to vent out all these frustrations as well as the deep divisions in British society along generation, class, regions and city versus country. The educated people with higher incomes and living in cities and university towns have voted to remain in the European Union.

The problem, therefore, is--- and it is all over Europe and the west--- that many people and their numbers are increasing, feel alienated with the political system that seems to ignore their concerns and cater for those who underwrite the system. The process of globalization, these people believe, is not working for them as it has increased unemployment by exporting jobs to China and elsewhere in the developing world and it is only the mega rich of their world that are making a killing out of the political system at home and its global extension. Therefore, they want the center of gravity to shift back by reclaiming national sovereignty. And Brexit is a manifestation of this. In the US, the Trump phenomenon is clearly rooted in collective neurosis of blaming everything on the ‘other’.

At the geopolitical level, Britain’s exit from Europe must please Russia by hopefully reducing London’s disproportionate weight in the western political and military councils. Within EU and NATO, Britain has been the most strident critic of Russian occupation of Crimea and its role in the Ukraine crisis. London espoused the most comprehensive sanctions regime against Russia linked to its policies to destabilize Ukraine. And it is also very active in the NATO military maneuvers to checkmate an anticipated threat of Russian destabilization in the Baltic states and eastern Europe. Moscow should be pleased at Brexit for two reasons. First: as noted earlier, it will cease to be part of the European ‘collective’ and hence not able to exercise as much influence as it did by being within the EU. Second: if British exit from the EU were to start a process of loosening/fragmenting of Europe, Russia will have greater scope to fish in the murky EU waters.

In all sorts of ways, the British referendum in favour of exiting EU is likely to set in motion centrifugal forces that will not only affect the United Kingdom and Europe but also the established global order. This would help China to further push its claim as the alternative power centre.