• Commentary
  • Research
  • Experts
  • Events
Carnegie China logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Peter Kellner"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Brexit and UK Politics"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Europe",
    "Western Europe",
    "United Kingdom"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "EU"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie Europe

Fate of Brexit Still Muddled After Latest Round of Votes in Parliament

Whatever fate Brexit meets, Britain’s reputation for competent, pragmatic political stability—built up over centuries—is being trashed. It will take years, perhaps decades, to restore.

Link Copied
By Peter Kellner
Published on Mar 15, 2019

Source: Axios

The U.K. government lost two significant votes this week, as Parliament rejected Prime Minister Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement and ruled out a no-deal Brexit. They also rejected some alternative proposals for resolving the crisis.

The big picture: The problem is that members of Parliament fall into four main groups on the Brexit issues, and none commands a majority.

What each group broadly supports:

  1. Leaving the EU without a deal
  2. Leaving the EU under May’s current agreement
  3. A “softer” departure that retains the closest possible trading links with the EU, minimizing damage to Britain’s economy (including the “Norway-plus” and “Common Market 2.0” plans)
  4. Remaining within the EU, especially if that’s the outcome supported by a new referendum (a small minority would simply revoke Britain’s application to leave the EU without putting a vote to the public)

Between the lines: A coalition of groups 3 and 4 could triumph, as a majority of MPs would prefer the kind of customs union or single market–style relationship the U.K. currently enjoys.

  • Group 4 MPs, however, consider a “soft” Brexit ridiculous: It would leave the U.K. bound by EU rules but with no say in them.

What’s happening: Before March 29, May will have one or two more attempts to revive her withdrawal agreement, which has twice been voted down by large majorities. She hopes that the no-deal brigade will crack, convinced that leaving Europe trumps all other causes.

  • If an extended deadline is sought, the pressure would shift to groups 3 and 4, but it’s far from clear they can agree on the fundamental choice: whether to uphold or challenge the sanctity of the 2016 referendum result.
  • There is a narrow chance May could untie the knot herself, perhaps through a proposal from two Labour MPs to subject the withdrawal agreement to a “confirmatory vote”: If approved by the electorate, it would come into effect, perhaps one month after the public vote. If rejected, it would keep the U.K. in the EU.

What to watch: It’s still unclear if the EU will grant an extension — and, if it does, for how long and on what terms. And a second referendum would take months to organize, raising questions around whether the U.K. would participate in European Parliamentary elections later this year.

Be smart: Whatever fate Brexit meets, Britain’s reputation for competent, pragmatic political stability — built up over centuries — is being trashed. It will take years, perhaps decades, to restore.

This article was originally published by Axios.

About the Author

Peter Kellner

Former Nonresident Scholar, Carnegie Europe

Kellner was a nonresident scholar at Carnegie Europe, where his research focused on Brexit, populism, and electoral democracy.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    The Moment of Truth for a UK-EU Reset

      Peter Kellner

  • Commentary
    The UK Braces for a Change of Direction

      Peter Kellner

Peter Kellner
Former Nonresident Scholar, Carnegie Europe
Peter Kellner
EUEuropeWestern EuropeUnited Kingdom

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie China

  • Commentary
    China-Europe Relations, Two Years After Russia Invaded Ukraine

    The Russian invasion of Ukraine is a turning point in the EU-China relationship, and evolution of the China-Russia relationship will continue to impact EU-China relations.

      Yifan Ding, Alice Ekman

  • Commentary
    Is Europe Aligned on China?

    Recent visits by European officials highlight the EU’s lack of internal cohesion.

      • +1

      Paul Haenle, Chan Heng Chee, Liu Yawei, …

  • Commentary
    Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine Has Jeopardized the China-EU Relationship

    “It’s not so clear how we’re going to get out of this.”

      Paul Haenle, Philippe Le Corre

  • Article
    Germany’s Strategic Gray Zone With China

    As the United States confronts China more directly, Merkel is exploring deeper cooperation with Xi. Economic upheaval from the coronavirus could reinforce the temptation in Berlin to keep Beijing close.

      Noah Barkin

  • Commentary
    How Are Various Countries Responding to China’s Belt and Road Initiative?

    Pitched as a new Silk Road sweeping from Asia to Europe, China’s enormous Belt and Road Initiative is an ambitious, multinational infrastructure project. Experts from four Carnegie global centers explain other countries’ perspectives.

      • Alexander Gabuev
      • +4

      Paul Haenle, Dmitri Trenin, Alexander Gabuev, …

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
Carnegie China logo, white
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.