On the 31st of January 2020, the United
Kingdom has finally left the European Union. After three years, numerous
debates, arguments, twists and turns, the Tory leadership of the country has
managed to strike a deal with its European partners and come to an agreement within
its own government.
This is the first time a country leaves the EU and it
is of great significance, since it is one of the oldest members. However, the British
leadership was never too keen on European integration. Euro-skepticism is
nothing new in the UK and the country’s press was for decades habitually EU
bashing, with little effort to counter their arguments by the government.
During the EU membership referendum, we have witnessed
lots of propaganda and misinformation from the Leave campaign, but also an
inability from the Remain side to present convincing arguments to persuade the
British public.
They resulted on focusing mainly on Russian meddling,
US takeover and numerous doomsday scenarios, for when the UK leaves the EU. The
truth is, the country is one of the richest nations in the world and it can survive
outside the EU, although surely weakened.
But it is sad that not just the British public, but
Europeans all over the continent are failing to realize the uniqueness of the
EU as a concept, but chose to fall for populists that bet in their greatest
concern of all: their pockets.
All EU bashing is revolving around the most basic
instincts of the European populace, their nationalistic sense of identity and
their wealth. Money is the reason why many countries chose to stay outside the EU
and why the UK decided to leave.
Money is also the reason why others chose to join or
are keen to do so in the future. They want to access to the single market, yet
once they enter the club, they often forget the obligations they have signed in
order to be accepted in the EU.
Few in Europe yet, see the EU as those who worked to
establish it in the past. It is the manifestation of an altruistic idea of a
united Europe, which arose from the ashes of a continent, torn by war.
Those visionaries who have witnessed its madness and
cruelty and lived through Europe’s most shameful pages in history, had as a
goal, the unification of our continent. However, since the 80’s, only years
after it joined, the UK started deviating from this vision.
Soon after the “poison” of Euro-skepticism spilled over
to other nations and how couldn’t it, since European politics became a fight over
interests and money, among our national governments. But the EU as a project should
not only a financial one. It is evident that if it is to succeed in the future,
it needs the citizens’ support.
And that can only be accomplished, once they get to
share the same vision as Europe’s forefathers, plus ideally, have their needs
met, their pockets and living standards filled and raised. Other unions operate
differently. They have a president, common language, religion and one of its
representatives, or a monarch to unite their populace.
What does Europe have, since if we focus solely on
wealth and money, we will inevitable fight over it. We need to start promoting
our ideals, values and vision among all layers of our social structure, from
the poorest to the richest, either that be nations or individuals.
I would be proud if Ireland or Greece ever became net
contributors to the EU’s budget for example, because that would mean that they
achieved to be considered among Europe’s richest nations, plus they can help
others reach the same goal. And that would be an honor.
However, that transfer of wealth can only be monitored
through a centralized governing body, just as it happens in other federal or
confederal political structures, like the USA. Thus, we need the EU, even if it
has itself problems with corruption, lobbying and red tape; we do not seek to
dismantle our national governments or parliaments, because our politicians are
corrupt, so why do we require this from the EU?
Our generation hasn’t lived through destruction or
war, so we take for granted the freedoms we enjoy. And it is sad to see our
willingness to sacrifice them, in order to satisfy the will of the rich minority.
Because those will be the ones who benefit the most from the disintegration of
the EU, not the average citizens.
The British public was conned to believe that by
exiting the EU, they would enjoy more wealth, save their NHS and they could manage
the levels of immigration in their country. Straight after they “got back
control,” their government announced that they are seeking to attract workers
from all over the world, to fill job vacancies.
As for the NHS, it was never in a bad shape because of
the EU, rather the mismanagement of the consequent British governments. It was plainly
used as a carrot to lure the public and fall in the trap.
The country’s leadership simply wants to be free of EU
regulation when conducting business, but not for the citizens’ benefit, rather
for their own and those who finance their political careers and campaigns, such
as the British and American business elites.
Therefore, we can see a very different UK from now on.
Surely not a much poorer country, albeit a more unequal one, a tax haven that
is competing with Europe in order to attract more businesses. The ordinary
British people won’t see much difference in wealth “trickling down” from this
shift, rather they plainly lost their EU citizenship and the rights that came
with it.
Funnily enough, they haven’t realized that for one
year until they finally agree on their future relationship with the EU, during
the 2020 negotiations with the block, Britain will have to obey EU rules
without having any say, as it lost its representatives.
And that is a far more serious loss of control and EU meddling,
something that Norway- the model country for many Brexiteers- must deal with
for decades now. But while Norway, a small Scandinavian nation can manage, how
will this go down with Britain, a country with global leader aspirations?
In addition, even Norway is looking closely how Brexit
will pan out for the Brits and perhaps rethink their position on EU membership.
Their EEA (European Economic Area) Agreement will be affected if Britain ever
tries to join or get a similar deal.
The EU as expected will play hardball during the
negotiations with the UK, which may well be extended for years. It must really.
If it allows the Brits out too easily, or with a very favorable agreement, then
other member states might seek similar treatment and that will cast the EU’s doom
as we know it. Perhaps that is what the UK bets on, however there is little
appetite shown for compromise in other member states.
To conclude, the United Kingdom will be fine outside
the EU, just as many other countries. Yet, why aren’t we collectively still convinced
about our greatest accomplishment as a continent and chose to remain behind nationalist
trenches? As if our greatest enemy to
our wealth is poorer European nations and their citizens.
Ultimately, if the UK ever decides to re-join, it
won’t happen for another 10-20 years. When they do, they will have to join the
euro and Schengen and that will be a much greater humiliation for the British leadership,
but perhaps a much necessary one.
However, there is also the risk that the United
Kingdom as a country won’t exist in its current form. With a potential
departure of Scotland in order to be in the EU, comes that of Northern Ireland
too, now that Sinn Fein has gained great support in last weekend’s election in
the Republic.
Leaving a very different country as potential new EU
member state, Anglo-centric and potentially met with suspicion by all other
member states. Unless, during their absence the EU manages to solidify its
structures and become more unified, it is unlikely they will ever allow “little
Britain” back in, with all its demands and opt-outs.