Beyond the Brexit and also the Grexit, the EU is surely coming up to encounter bigger battles in regard to migration, visa-free access and global terrorism. The fallout of these problems may be catastrophic and eventually, the idea of the ever greater union may fall apart
The European Union’s lacklustre response to the Brexit issue has sharply generated a “renewed Euroskepticism” in Britain once again. It is a fact that Britain has always maintained an ambivalent and at times a purely contentious affair with the European Union (EU). It is to be noted that Britain distanced herself from both the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and European Economic Community (EEC) when the entire continent was badly struggling to reintegrate its constituents just to avoid another devastating war in Europe. The UK did not join the EEC till 1973, and only in 1975, the British people approved the membership under a referendum. But there has been a suspicion of political union with the rest of Europe in Britain. To many Britons, the European project is understood to have a deeper agenda beyond mere economic integration and definitely towards a ‘European Superstate’ under the leadership of the EU. As integration deepened throughout the 1980s and 1990s, the political leaders in Britain had made their own strategies to preserve the unique identity of the nation. As a result, the UK did not join the single currency (Euro) and the border free Schengen area. Besides, the British leaders had worked hard even to negotiate a reduced budget contribution to the EU.
For decades, london has maintained a safe distance from Brussels and now the d-day has come on June 23 to decide on a historic referendum, whether to stay in the EU or say goodbye. Some experts on the EU governance say it is just a “referendum roulette” (Trechsel 2005), which strongly represents a potential hazard for the integration process, not just in traditionally Euro-sceptic countries like Britain, but in all member countries for now.
What is there behind BrexitIJ We need to look for answers in not only how Britain is behaving now but also in gradual declining of the institution of the State in the growing influence of globalisation. For nearly 300 years or more, State has dominated all other institutions existing in society and it has exercised its very exclusive power i.e. sovereignty to regulate the affairs of human civilisations. But in the last more than half a century, the omnipotent State has started losing its grip over both its man and material altogether. One of the most significant factors that has contributed to this entire saga is none other than the emergence of global governance institutions and more particularly, the arrival of some of the powerful regional identities like the EU, which are fast scuttling the power and prestige of many former colonial empires. Herein we could situate the growing insecurity of Britain which is strongly putting forward the claim of its sovereignty outside the framework of the EU’s one-upmanship that is pushing the country towards “groaning powerlessness” in every passing year.
Again under the EU, States like Britain and France, feel that they are fast being marginalised where the national Governments are simply becoming obedient actors of Brussels. Today, “responsibilities have instead shifted to the European level, leaving national legislatures weaker and more marginalised in a process that has sometimes been described (pejoratively) as creeping federalism. National legislatures once had almost complete authority to make laws as their members saw fit, within the limitations created by constitutions, public opinion, the powers of other Government institutions, and the international community” (McCormick 2008). Thus over the years, the competence of the EU institutions has expressly grown at the cost of the member states. At the outset, power was only transferred under the terms of the ECSC, but gradually, the emergence of the EU, has almost taken over many crucial aspects of the national Governments. Hence, it is broadly agreed that since the beginning, the EU institutions have been given competence over a wide set of policy issues which lead to the declining of the power and autonomy of the members in the process. In fact, most of the policy areas for which the EU has formal competence are clearly outlined in the treaties and conventions, assumption being that the rest lies with the national legislatures. McCormick argues that there is much ambiguity built in to the system, and there is no clear distinction between exclusive and nonexclusive competence, with the result that authority in most areas is divided, the balance of power in some areas tending towards the EU, and in other areas towards the member States. However, in reality almost all policy areas and decisions pertaining to the implementation of the same, are largely influenced by the EU.
When it comes to real issues, it must be underlined that many conservatives have never ever reconciled with the very idea of Britain’s membership with the EU. Today the discontent is mostly risen over migration mainly from the rest of the EU to Britain. UK PM David Cameron himself has said, “It was never envisaged that free movement would trigger quite such vast numbers of people moving across our continent.” At present the British left party supports Cameron in remaining in the EU, whereas the leave camp consists of anti-establishment ideologies, from disaffected labourites to the UK Independence Party (UKIP) on the far right. Meanwhile, the referendum has deeply split Britain’s mainstream conservatives. Cameron has staked his political future on the “remain” position, but ironically half of his Conservative Party, including several of his Ministers, strongly support the “leave campaign”.
The pro-leave campaign advocates squarely blame the European institutional architecture for its Byzantine rules and regulations which are simply imposed on Britain without considering the local interests. Justice Minister Michael Gove strongly argues, “laws which govern citizens in this country are decided by politicians from other nations who we never elected and can’t throw out.” It can be very well said that a section of the Britons have developed deep disdain for EU’s common laws and the helplessness of their people in not having any control over the same. It is understood that a “one-size-fits-all’ regime of the EU simply does not work at least for Britain.
Some economic analysts solely blame the EU institutions for their sheer unpreparedness or for their complete inefficiency in tackling the pressure of the globalised economic ups and downs. Herein the best ever arguments are offered by economist Roger Bootle in his “The Trouble With Europe”. To him the EU’s focus on continent-wide harmonisation of standards, everything from labour regulations to the size of olive oil containers, threatens Europe with persistent low growth and high unemployment. But it must be noted that the labour market in the UK is much more flexible than any other country of the EU only for which the country is simply outperforming the continent.
With Brexit mania travelling far and wide across the EU, along with the migration dilemma, it seems highly unlikely that in future, it would be impossible to compel the referendum genie back into the bottle once again or forever, or to stop the disintegration of the EU in the long run. For many, at the heart of the Brexit move is the imposing structure of the European laws, institutions and policies, which are being erected on the basis of some operational principles that have remained largely implicit; nevertheless these have shaped the emerging political culture of the EU. It is simply impossible to understand why the EU (the bosses at Brussels) failed to realise the looming crisis of the union long back. Its top policymakers could have gradually unleashed diverse packages (not of course unitary measures) to prevent the current predicament of the EU project i. e. first the Brexit, and then growing legitimacy crisis of the union with fast alienation of its people from its institutional fabric. Arguably, countries like Britain, especially feels that the most important of the EU’s implicit operational principles is none other than “integration”, which the country dithers so much, even if Cameron tries to blow the trumpet of the “remain campaign” (for which he is also not truly convinced).
Beyond the Brexit and also the Grexit, the EU is surely coming up to encounter bigger battles in regard to migration, visa free access and global terrorism. The fallout of these problems may be catastrophic and eventually, the idea of the ever greater union may fall apart. Brexit is just the tip of the iceberg. The crux of the problem is the “one-size-fits-all” policy of the Brussel regime for all very and entirely diverse Europe which may herald more and more dissension among most of the members of the EU. Though the process of Brexit may be cumbersome (even after a win over the “leave campaign”), but Britain is obviously heading for substantial loss of both economic and political clout within and outside the union. Besides, Brexit movement may trigger an immediate impact on a new Scottish referendum and this may be the beginning of an end of Cameron’s political career!
(The writer is an independent political analyst based in Delhi)