Commentary
Peter Kellner
{
"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
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.
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:- Leaving the EU without a deal
- Leaving the EU under May’s current agreement
- 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)
- 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.
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.
- The Moment of Truth for a UK-EU Reset
- The UK Braces for a Change of DirectionCommentary
Peter Kellner
Recent Work
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 Endowment for International Peace
- Russia’s Imperial Retreat Is Europe’s Strategic OpportunityCommentary
The war in Ukraine is costing Russia its leverage overseas. Across the South Caucasus and Middle East, this presents an opportunity for Europe to pick up the pieces and claim its own sphere of influence.
William Dixon, Maksym Beznosiuk
- Is the Radical-Right Threat Existential or Overstated?Commentary
Amid increased polarization and the influence of disinformation, radical-right parties are once again gaining traction across Europe. With landmark elections on the horizon in several countries, are the EU’s geostrategic vision and fundamental values under existential threat?
Catherine Fieschi, Cas Mudde
- Belligerent and Beleaguered: Russia After the War with UkrainePaper
No matter how its war against Ukraine ends, Russia will emerge less secure, more aggrieved, and posing a greater threat to Europe than it did when it started this war.
Eugene Rumer
- Europe and the Arab Gulf Must Come TogetherCommentary
The war in Iran proves the United States is now a destabilizing actor for Europe and the Arab Gulf. From protect their economies and energy supplies to safeguarding their territorial integrity, both regions have much to gain from forming a new kind of partnership together.
Rym Momtaz
- Taking the Pulse: Is France’s New Nuclear Doctrine Ambitious Enough?Commentary
French President Emmanuel Macron has unveiled his country’s new nuclear doctrine. Are the changes he has made enough to reassure France’s European partners in the current geopolitical context?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
