Is the EU in danger of collapse following the UK’s decision to leave? Miguel Angel Lara Otaola writes that Brexit represents a key challenge for Europe’s post-war system of open markets, cooperation between nations, stability, and peace. He argues that both the UK and the rest of the EU will need to be constructive in their negotiations if they are to avoid aggravating tensions and divisions.
In 1946, Winston Churchill spoke in Zurich, Switzerland, about the tragedy of Europe. The signing of the treaty of Versailles after the First World War did little to prevent future conflicts amongst the countries of Europe. It was too harsh on the losers, taking away their political influence, territories and colonies, and making them pay extremely costly war reparations. It also included a ‘war-guilt’ clause that sought to make Germany solely responsible for the war, which was not the case.
This brought about economic crisis and unemployment and fuelled resentment and nationalism within Germany. Anti-democratic leaders vowing to change this situation and end the post-Versailles treaty order came to power. As a result, the Second World War followed and once again Europe was at war. Tyrants and dictators repressed opposition groups and parties, cancelled democratic freedoms of speech and assembly, and committed unparalleled crimes and genocide. After the conflict, millions lay dead, cities were ruined, homes were destroyed and what was left of an entire generation was in despair.
This could have been fertile ground for scapegoating and easy solutions, matching those promised in the 1930s. However, the mistakes committed after the First World War were avoided. The lesson of “The Economic Consequences of the Peace” had been learnt. The remedy, in the words of Churchill himself, was to re-create the European Family and provide it with a structure under which it could dwell in peace, in safety, and in freedom. A kind of United States of Europe.
This is what actually happened. After the war, a group of visionary people dedicated all their talent and energy to end the frequent conflicts in the continent. A project for peace, unity and prosperity was founded, starting with the establishment of the Council of Europe in 1949, the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, and the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1957. In parallel, the US launched the Marshall Plan to provide economic support to rebuild Europe. The aim was to prevent future conflicts through open markets, free trade, economic integration and the promotion of cooperation between European countries. In short, the goal was to ‘make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible’.
With Brexit, this project is now at risk. The risk, however, does not come from the economic and financial consequences we have seen so far. It is not about the dramatic drop in the value of the pound to levels not seen since 1985, or the plunge in the European stock markets, or the talk of moving jobs to Europe by some London banks, the resignation of David Cameron or the divisions in the Labour Party. It is not even about the bureaucratic and legal nightmare that will ensue if Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is invoked, which involves figuring out how trade in goods and services, migration, and EU legislation will work with regards to the UK.
The risk does not come from what the Brexit referendum was formally about: the UK leaving the European Union. The risk comes from what it was actually about for some: anger and hate. The referendum unleashed an isolationist and anti-immigration mindset among some of the populace. The tragic murder of MP Jo Cox, an advocate of Syrian refugees and of the UK staying in the EU by a madman reported to have yelled “Britain First” (the name of a far-right group) just a week before the referendum is a case in point. So is the racist graffiti at the Polish Cultural Centre in Hammersmith, London and the rise in racist incidents reported after the referendum. This has not been Britain’s “finest hour”.
The Vote Leave camp criticised the UK’s open door to Europe, asking to vote “Leave” in order to take back control of the country. This divisive campaign fuelled nationalism and has threatened the European project and its values. Extremist politicians are on the rise in Europe and some have called for referendums on their own countries leaving the EU. It is not a coincidence that amongst those celebrating Brexit are Marine Le Pen from the Front National in France, the neo-fascist Golden Dawn party in Greece and Donald Trump in the United States, a man who has called for the banning of Muslims entering the US and the building of a border wall with Mexico (the United States’ second largest trading partner).
Brexit may be the first domino to fall, and the fear is that this could be the start of a trend against the post-war system of open markets, cooperation between nations, stability, and peace. Moreover, our divisions within Europe benefit the imperialistic and belligerent agendas of anti-democratic regimes such as Russia and China.
We cannot allow this. As a member of a family who has experienced the horrors of nationalism and intolerance, as a European and as a proud member of Western Civilisation I cannot stand by this. It is not about the economic consequences of Brexit. I am a firm believer in British ingenuity and I am certain the UK can weather the storm and still be a thriving economy and an attractive destination for investment and trade. It is about avoiding a new dark age. An age of division, isolation, and hatred.
We cannot ignore the legitimacy of the referendum. It was a free vote. However, there are several things the British people can do to reassure that their country is still outward-looking, committed to international cooperation, and a strong ally of Europe. Write to your MP and tell them to consider the consequences of Brexit and vote with their conscience when the time comes. Tell them to support a referendum on the withdrawal terms so that Britain does not abandon the EU completely. Encourage them to pursue a European and internationalist agenda.
Tell them to condemn, strongly and publicly, any racist expressions, threats or attacks occurring in their parliamentary constituency or indeed anywhere in the country. Wear a safety pin. Join the rallies to increase pressure on parliament and on the government, so that this historic and strategic bond is not completely broken.
At the same time, there is something that must be done by the leaders of the EU. During these confusing times, they should not treat the UK harshly for the outcome of the referendum. Trying to make an example of the UK can aggravate tensions and division and provoke more nationalist sentiments in the UK and across the whole of Europe.
Again, as Churchill said in Switzerland, “If Europe is to be saved from infinite misery, and indeed from final doom, there must be an act of faith in the European family”. We need to leave behind post-Brexit nationalism and keep Britain Great.
Please read our comments policy before commenting.
Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy, nor of the London School of Economics.
Shortened URL for this post: http://bit.ly/2aH6kM2
_________________________________
About the author
Miguel Angel Lara Otaola
Miguel Angel Lara Otaola is a Visiting Fellow at the Electoral Integrity Project at the Universities of Sydney and Harvard, and a Doctoral Researcher at the University of Sussex. He has worked for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Mexico’s National Electoral Institute (INE), amongst others. He has also participated as an electoral observer in several missions in Australia, the EU and Latin America.
Just more of the same nonsense, British people voted “leave” because it was all about a wave of racism, xenophobia and general nastiness, not just that though, its contagious and other parts of the EU may catch it and there are people like Le Pen, Golden Dawn etc. just waiting to spread the disease.
No, no one voted to leave because of the dictatorial approach of the EU, the utter chaos around migration crisis, the unwelcome involvement of the EU on the minutia of daily life, the freedom of movement, the list goes on, no, none of this figured at all.
The EU has gone from a trading group to a would be state, it is ineffective and has failed and deserves to collapse, it can then reform itself back to what it was.
Miguel, people voted leave for a number of reasons, only about 30% had migration as no1 issue (not necessarily a racist issue, but that we cant take 300k a year new immigrants every year). Other issues were the 200m a week net contribution, the waste and corruption of eu, the dislike of juncker who seems wholly unfit to be eu president, the fact the eu has had virtually no growth in 10 years, the destruction of soutyern eu states with mass unemployment, the massive increase in regulations that hamper growth, the loss of sovereignty to an institution that started life as a trading block. The more that people like you try to spin the argument in to race/hatred (which is wholly incorrect) the more likely the eu will fail to reform and collapse, bringing missery to millions and possible war. Shame on you.
I totally concur. Were there xenophobes and racist that joined the bandwagon? Yes, but the majority were against the insidious agenda that turned a free market idea (EEC) into an undemocratic political grab for power. Juncker must resign for leadership failure.
If you think the EU collapsing would be a good thing then you’re not living in reality. But of course most of the rabid Eurosceptics who churn this stuff out in comment sections all across the internet aren’t particularly interested in reality – it’s pointless venting for the sake of it. Why have a meaningful critique of the EU’s legislative process when we can pretend it’s a “dictatorship”? Why discuss the balance of competences when we can claim it’s a “would be state” in the making? Why propose a reasonable migration policy when we can just grandstand about the migration crisis?
Do you have any actual coherent point to offer on a way forward? Just one? Gibbering away about the EU collapsing isn’t a solution to anything.
Warren, the many failings of the eu are very clear. An example of previous attempt at reform by UK. In 2006 blair gave up 40% of uk rebate in return for comprehensive reform of cap. Once the rebate was surrendered, the reform was shelved. This shows that the eu is not reformable. The peace that the eu likes to say it created was actually created by nato, marshall plan and uk/usa writing of german debt. The 2 main eu achievements of schengen and euro are in chaos. Schenden is suspended, euro has trapped southern countries in permanent recession. The eu does a great job of talking but its record of 0 growth in 10 years is very poor compared to rest of world. The main thing the eu does well is taking members money and make them beg for it back, but they have to put up a blue plaque thanking the eu. Also the donations to various lefty institutions so that supposedly educated people will defend the eu to safeguard their own interests.
Well said!
@William Smith
I don’t know where to start with so much BS
it’s really a “how-to” guide for brainwashing and dumbing down people
1) CAP is a continuous work in progress, in terms of its provisions
that means, it’s continuously being reformed to reflect the interests of its (currently) 28 members
claiming it’s unreformable because the member states refused to adopt the lunacies of fringe groups (both left and right) is non-sequitur
in addition, CAP is only one (though emblematic as truly european policy-wise) EU program
the European Union, its institutions and its actions are constantly evolving. there is no status-quo
whether it goes in a direction that YOU favor, doesn’t make it “unreformable” … only that YOU are not being listened to when policies are crafted
since most EU decisions are implemented nationally, the main responsibility belongs to the member-states as regards the success/failure of those decisions
let’s take CAP for example, it’s DEFRA who is responsible for implementing EU decisions re-payments, health and safety and
pretty much all “bureaucracy” that farmers in the UK have to comply with is framed as per the UK civil service directive… that’s probably why the UK is regularly chastised for failing to provide timely confirmations that CAP funds are properly disbursed (in the EU Auditors report)
2) the EU ensured peace and liberal democracy in Europe is a reality
that’s not an opinion, it;s a fact
NATO is only concerned to marshall european armed forces agaisnt a soviet/russian forces
that’s why they didn’t bother having the autocratic military dictatorships of Portugal and Greece as members
nor why it pretty much let Cyprus get invaded by Turkey
or currently, why it’s purposefully antagonising Russia by trying to isolate it by meddling into its immediate neighbourhood and inviting Georgia and Ukraine into its fold
I certainly welcome the continuing liberal democratisation and market economy opening of those 2 countries, but I also understand why Russia would feel threatened by having an imperialist military alliance trying to eliminate its erstwhile safe buffer-zone
just look at history, and consider how the US reacted when socialist-led movements developped in South, Central and Caribbean americas
in Chile, the US financed a military dictatorship to take back control
in Central Americas, they supported Death Squads to murder (ethnic cleanse would be even more appropriate) their political opponents
in the Caribbean, they invaded and actively tried to destroy Cuba’s governement
the Mashall Plan was a lend-lease program for western europe in exchange of political fealty to the american fight against the soviets.
not wanting to dismiss it, but its effects were largely gone by the mid-60′ …. yet the EU kept on prospering
German debt wasn’t “written-off” completely … it was repackaged, and in exchange, West germany had to be occupied by foreign forces for 50 years, and have little autonomy in foreign policy when it comes to US geopolitics (cue the backlash over Willy Brandt OstPolitik)
essentially, NATO is a military Alliance who only cares about defeating the soviet/russian and couldn’t give a fig about peace in Europe if it’s not subordinated to that objective
on the other hand, the EU (and its predecessor the EEC) is devoted to ensuring shared economic prosperity and the assuaging of centuries-old nationalistic tensions.
in that regards, it worked splendidly well.
the fact that many Europeans are too wealthy and neurotic to realize just how lucky and well they are, is an entirely different problem
3) Schengen is suspended ?
get a reality check, mate
some countries have temporarily reinstated border checks for periods of of a few months in order to filter non-EU migrants
but evey European citizens whose country is a member of the Schengen Area is still free to roam from Lisbao to Tallinn or from The Hague to Capri, anytime they want
the problem here is twofold
a) confidence that external borders of the Schengen Area are properly monitored (cue Greece and the Balkans)
b) that a common migration policy is framed where EU countries have the right to set their own levels of non-EU immigeration, while sharing the burdens when they refuse to have any intake (cue Central Europe nationalistic governments)
a rather “simple” way, would be to set a quota for each countries depending on its size and relative wealth, then affixing a “value” for each migrants reflecting the initial costs of housing and acculturation.
countries that accept below-quota migrants would pay a fine that would go towards helping those countries that take above-quota numbers, thus respecting everybody’s wishes
currently, european central european are playing race politics by wanting unfettered migration for their own populations towards others EU countries, EU funding and no non-EU migration … the British disease of “having their cake and eating it”
the Euro is in chaos ?
well, you would have to distinguished between the currency, who is definitely not “in chaos”, because it’s traded globally everyday, especially as a reserve currency, and performs its expected duties in the pocket and the bank accounts of EU citizens
then you have the financial infrastructure of banking institutions of the Euro-area (and more generally of European banks, including the UK), where many are burdened with sizeable bad loans, and lack a common dispute settlement (is it each member country where the bank is located that suffers the losses, the shareholders or the citizens, or a pan-european contribution ?)
and finally, you have the macro-economic policies of each member-states, that is how do decide to spend the taxpayers money and reform their economies to make them adept in a globalized world
…. which pretty much has nothing to do with the currency per se, and a LOT more about domestic politics
the reason why Greece is a such a basket case, why Southern Europe (and to a lesser extent Central and Eastern Europe) failed economics 101 for the past 2 decades by running large current-account deficits with inefficient state institutions (why Italy is ranked in the bottom 50 of the world ranking for its openess to market economy is very much a cause of its current economic travails, and little to nothing to do with what currency they use)
4) EU has had no growth in past 10 years ?
let’s put it like this, for the period 2005-2015
Euro-area GDP growth over the past 10 years averaged 0.3%
the UK GDP averaged 0.5%
the US GDP averaged 1%
before you get all chummy
in the case of both US and UK, external migration has been a huge driver of that economic prosperity
you also have to take into account the difference in statistical methods (the UK governments likes to massage the numbers for good PR stunts, like adding new elements to the GDP counts or changing the way it counts them) and the role of a younger workforce (Europe has the oldest workforce, bar japan, thus with less productivity)
in essence, for the past 10 or so years, the UK has resumed an economic policy of “boom and bust”, by lavishing money onto pet projects, while depressing real wages (-10% over a decade) and expanding a poor working-class (do you remember the last time they advertised the numbers of charitable kitchen soup ? well, they run into the several thousands in the UK and are starved for funding).
only healthy and motivated to work young migrants have prevented a total backlash … though seeing by who voted for Brexit, looks like the chicken are finally coming home to roost.
can’t wait to see the reactions of the old coots, when they are told that their public pensions and entitlements are unsustainable and have to be slashed by a third or half … it’ll be hilarious 🙂
@Starbuck
1) Dishonest evasion of Smith’s point that Blair did indeed concede part of the British rebate in exchange for reform of the CAP that never happened. Nothing you say about CAP addresses his point.
2) “the EU ensured peace and liberal democracy in Europe is a reality
that’s not an opinion, it;s [sic] a fact”. Actually, no, that’s opinion, not fact. Shame you can’t tell the difference. Western Europe had democracy imposed upon it by British, American and Canadian troops who landed at Normandy in 1944 and fought their way into Germany. Thereafter, Western Europe — in particular West Germany had American troops stationed in it. American troops who would have made quick work of any would-be Hitler, Napoleon or whatever other dictator Continental Europeans have a habit of following. That this American power was disguised by NATO is irrelevant. The EU is the beneficiary of peace and liberal democracy in Europe, not it’s guarantor.
3) Schengen is suspended? Yes, by some member states. Get a reality check, mate.
4) EU has had no growth in past 10 years? Er, no, but what growth there has been has been anemic. British growth has been better. Not spectacularly so, but better. The unemployment rate in the UK, meantime, is much better. The rest of your blather about “the difference in statistical methods” is just you demonstrating your ignorance of economics. HM Government’s statistics, by the way, are internationally recognised as being more accurate than most every other state in Europe and France in particular. But, as we’ve demonstrated, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Actually, William, your example (CAP) is woefully inadequate for what you’re trying to prove: CAP has been reformed a great deal (it’s far less of the budget now than it used to be).
But that’s completely besides the point. I’ve had this conversation thousands and thousands of times before with angry Eurosceptics on the internet who refuse to acknowledge anything remotely positive about the EU and speak in bizarrely exaggerated terms about “dictatorships” and “superstates” (see Karl for a textbook example). Literally every conversation with these people boils down to some ridiculously simplistic dialogue in which one side tries to prove the EU is perfect and the other tries to prove the EU is the worst development in human history. It’s a pointless discussion, we’ve had it for decades, change the record.
What I asked for is a constructive comment rather than the same tired Eurosceptic whining we’ve all heard a thousand times before. What precisely is it that you support – remaining part of the single market, a bilateral trade agreement (if so what is contained in it), a broader trading relationship outside of Europe, etc. I ask Eurosceptics this on the internet regularly and about 98% of the time it’s ignored (again, see Karl for an example) but very occasionally someone actually puts forward a coherent point and we can have a real conversation.
Warren – Have you anything positive to say on behalf f the EU, because your comment appears to be lacking of anything, apart from criticism of “Eurosceptics”.
I note that William Smith has offered a good selection, perhaps you have the courage of your convictions and would like to respond?
Btw. I have managed a number of projects which were “funded” by the EU and it led to me saying never, ever again, happy to share the details.
William
I got pretty fed up during the referendum with people claiming the EU wasn’t growing and had become a basket case. The truth is that it averaged 1.8% a year growth over the last ten years, and bounced back from the recession much faster than Britain did. The UK’s much trumpeted recovery was very late, very short term, and leaves us with a chronic productivity problem.
The euro is not in chaos – it has performed better than the pound over most of its life. That’s a problem for governments who would like to defend on deficit finance and devaluation – which is what the UK is doing now, but few believe that’s a long run route for success.
Schengen is under pressure mainly because of the refugee criss – but to believe that things would have been better if there had been no EU is like believing in the tooth fairy. Xenophobic responses by governments (like Hungary) who actually need migrants to run their economies are responses to political and economic failure at national level.
The biggest economic achievement of the EU is the single market, the growth it brings and the clout that it gives internationally. We are about to find that our the hard way. If you want to defend on military alliances to keep the peace, prepare for war. But that’s not what Churchill was advocating in a United States of Europe.
So safety pins ward off racists! Thanks for the tip.
I think that all immigrants should leave uk and work in their coutries as hard as they worked in the uk.. immigrants are brave .. intelligent ..hard workers ..tax payers.. addaptable and don’t deserve this treatment .. one day Britain will realise how hard immigrants have contributed for this country.. and maybe it will be too late ..no one likes to be unwanted in a coutry you are living in . Hope all them leave to make countries they are welcome a better place to live .. and then wait… The world goes around..
I AM NOT WORRYING FOR UNITED KINGDOM, FOR UNITED KINGDOM HAS MORE INFLUENCE THAN ANY OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRY. TO ME UK WON’T GET ISOLATED AFTER BREXIT, ECONOMICALLY AND SOCIALLY. HOWEVER WHAT I AM WORRYING ABOUT IS EU. EU MAY GET DISINTEGRATED WITH ECONOMIC DISASTER AND EVENTUALLY TOTAL COLLAPSE.
I WILL WRITE TO MY LOCAL MP.
THANKS
What i voted to join in 1975 is not what it has turned into now. The trading between the western European nations in 1975 was a good idea. It did not include the eastern European nations that were under Soviet rule. There was no talk of a european parliament and a single currency and our laws made by an unelected forum. I voted leave and been accused of being a racist, murderer and a senile old fool (I am 74). All these people shouted at me. If people have to shout to get there message over then I belive they are losing their argument.
Brexit wont lead to the collapse of the EU, The Euro and the common currency will lead to its downfall, and the fall of the US dollar will just push it over the edge , The American debt cieling is back , but this time it is going to be far more distructive ,