Quitting the EU is an
option.
LONDON — Europe was pummeled by crises from start to
finish in 2015, with terrorist attacks, bankruptcy brinkmanship
and an unparalleled refugee influx
combining to leave continental unity in tatters by year’s end.
But instead of relief, 2016 could bring an unraveling.
In addition to the flash points of the past year — all of
which are poised to flare again — Britain is likely to throw fresh instability
into the mix with a referendum on whether to leave the European Union. Once
judged an unlikely prospect, many observers now see a 50-50 chance that
populist-minded, immigration-fearing British voters will elect to cut this
island nation adrift from a continent beset by existential struggles.
If they do, it would mark the first time in the E.U.’s
history that a country has chosen to withdraw, reversing what had been seen as
an inexorable expansion of the pact credited with bringing peace and stability
to the historically bloody lands of Europe.
A British exit could hasten a broader E.U. breakup, with
continental leaders despairing that an already strained union may struggle to
survive without one of its cornerstone members. Washington, too, has much to
lose if the country that has traditionally bridged the Atlantic divide opts to
sail off into the icy depths of the North Sea. And the United Kingdom itself
could fall apart if Britain chooses to leave, with pro-E.U. Scotland likely to
revive its demand for independence.
But all of that may not be enough to outweigh the
anxieties of British voters who gaze across the English Channel and see nothing
but trouble.
As Europe’s crises have multiplied over the past year,
the once-overwhelming share of British voters who favor staying inside the E.U.
has dwindled — with some polls showing the contest dead-even. And the “out” campaign
has room to grow if Europe’s problems persist, as most analysts expect they
will.
“Given that by any objective measure the E.U. is in a
terrible mess, I’m shocked that the ‘in’ campaign is still getting half,” said
Charles Grant, director of the London-based Center for European
Reform.
Grant said he wants to see Britain remain part of the
E.U., but he is pessimistic that it will. Fears about immigration explain why.
“It’s always quite easy to scare people,” Grant said. “If the British vote to leave the E.U., it will be because of worries about migration and refugees.”
Britain has largely insulated itself
from the historic exodus of millions of people fleeing the war zones that ring
Europe. It has opted out of an E.U.-wide refugee-relocation program and has
used the 19 miles of water that separate this nation from the European mainland
as a barrier to those who try to make it here on their own.
But anti-E.U. campaigners have conflated the refugee
issue with a record level of net-migration to Britain, much of which is fueled
by European citizens moving here for economic reasons. Under the E.U.’s
free-movement principle, Britain can’t stop them, prompting “out” advocates to
argue that the country has lost control of its borders and can only get it back
by ditching the E.U.
The more that Europe has struggled with its management of
refugee flows — and with other thorny problems, including terrorism and debt —
the more confident anti-E.U. advocates have become that they will prevail.
“The momentum is on our side,” said Nigel Farage, leader
of the U.K. Independence Party and the country’s most prominent E.U. opponent.
“For those of us who believe in nation-state democracy, 2016 is a very bright
dawn indeed.”
A British vote to leave, Farage proclaimed in a December
speech on the floor of the European Parliament, would mark a “tipping point”
that could doom the E.U. — an outcome that the bombastic former commodities
trader has made clear he would welcome gleefully.
It was political pressure from Farage and from
Euro-skeptics within Prime Minister David Cameron’s own Conservative Party that
led him to promise a referendum in the first place. At the time, in January
2013, a British vote to leave seemed improbable.
Now
Cameron is locked in delicate negotiations with his fellow E.U. leaders that
could determine whether Britain stays or goes. The prime minister has vowed he
will lead the campaign to keep Britain within Europe “with all my heart and
soul,” but only if he can extract meaningful
concessions
that will give the E.U. less influence over British affairs.
Cameron’s
demands include permission for Britain to opt out of the E.U.’s founding
ambition to “forge ever closer union”; greater power for national parliaments
to block E.U. legislation; and formal recognition that the euro isn’t the
union’s only currency.
European
leaders have signaled that they’re willing to deal on those issues. But
Cameron’s fourth demand — a restriction on benefits for immigrants from within
the E.U. — is far trickier. As German Chancellor Angela Merkel and others have
pointed out, such a move would violate core E.U. principles that bar
discrimination on the basis of nationality.
The issue
is critical if Cameron wants to show he’s serious about reducing immigration to
Britain — a promise he’s repeatedly made but has been unable to fulfill. And
yet, with only weeks to go until a critical E.U. summit, there’s little
indication of how negotiators can break the deadlock.
“Cameron
can’t go into the referendum with nothing on this,” said Stephen Booth, co-director
of the London-based think tank Open
Europe.
“But what will the compromise be? We really don’t know.”
Despite
the uncertainty, Cameron has said he wants to make a deal by February and has
hinted that the referendum could come as soon as this summer.
After
making his case for reform to fellow E.U. leaders over dinner in Brussels in
late December, he told reporters that “2016 will be the year we achieve
something really vital, fundamentally changing the U.K.’s relationship with the
E.U. and finally addressing the concerns of the British people about our
membership.”
But it
could also be the year that divides his party — and costs him the premiership.
If Cameron leads the “in” campaign and loses, he will come under pressure to
resign just a year after leading the Conservatives to a commanding victory in
national elections.
Cameron’s
own cabinet is divided on the Europe question, and at least some of his
ministers are expected to campaign for an exit, although none have shown their
hand.
One
person who has made his views known is President Obama, who told the BBC last summer that
Britain’s E.U. membership “gives us much greater confidence about the strength
of the transatlantic union.”
Without
Britain, the E.U. would be greatly diminished, having lost the world’s
fifth-largest economy and military. It would also take Europe’s focus away from
its other struggles, which continue to demand urgent attention.
“The E.U.
has got enough on its plate right now,” Booth said. “It doesn’t need one of its
biggest and most dynamic members leaving.”
Comments
The UK
has more than their share of Muslims and is wise to refuse to sign up for the
Muslim Reinvasion of Europe. Muslim kids from Pakistan have ruined their public
schools. No-Go Zones and Sharia will plague them forever. They really need to
deport them back to Pakistan. The UK
should also quit the EU and let this piece of UN Agenda 21 unravel.
Norb
Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment