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
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.
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 ResetCommentary
- 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
- “It’s Not Like Turning a Switch On and Off”Commentary
Why the Iran ceasefire isn’t a quick fix to the Strait of Hormuz energy crisis.
Helima Croft, Aaron David Miller
- Europe Cannot Sit Out the Iran WarCommentary
The Greenland crisis taught Europe to push back against Washington. In Iran, it must learn how to engage without falling in line.
Sophia Besch
- Unstrategic Ambiguity: Trump’s Erratic Approach Leaves Europe GuessingArticle
The behaviors, public statements, and policies of Donald Trump’s administration have perverted America’s strategic posture toward Europe.
Dan Baer, Erik Brown
- On NATO, Trump Should Embrace France Instead of Bashing ItCommentary
Donald Trump’s repudiation of NATO goes against the Make America Great Again vision of a U.S.-centered foreign policy. If the goal is to preserve the alliance by boosting Europe’s commitments, leaning into France’s vision is the most America First way forward.
Rym Momtaz
- Kindred Nations, Uneasy Neighbors: Polish-Ukrainian Relations in the Crucible of Russia’s WarArticle
The full-scale invasion cemented Ukraine’s determination to sever its ties with Russia; reimagining the Poland-Ukraine partnership can accelerate Kyiv’s westward alignment and improve the security of both countries.
Eric Green