At the root of concern among British voters lies the forfeiture of national authority. Up to 55% of Britain's laws are now set in Brussels. Tim Montgomerie, a columnist for the Times of London, while admitting that there are real risks to a Brexit, sums up the argument favoring separation as follows: "All risks are real. But so are the risks of remaining a part of a politically dysfunctional and economically declining EU. There is a strong pragmatic case for believing that a Europe of such different political cultures cannot work, but the real reason why British voters should support Brexit is that we want our country to have what the U.S., Australia, Switzerland, Canada, Japan and other free nations already have: self-determination." Many believe that the campaign leading up to June 23 will be a contest between hearts and minds. Those pushing for exit appeal to voters instincts, while their opponents focus on jobs and security.
David Cameron, who now probably regrets having committed to hold a referendum, argues that for economic and national security reasons the U.K. would be better off staying in the EU. Industry watchers fear a vote to leave the EU would diminish London's role as a financial gateway to Europe. Over the past two decades London has become home to more than 250 foreign banks, on the promise that by being based in London they could seamlessly do business all over the EU. A Brexit could instigate a stampede and shuffle banks back into the European Union. Moreover, the EU takes almost half of all Britain's exports, while Britain takes less than 10% from the EU. An immediate effect of the early run-up to the referendum already resulted in a precipitous drop in the value of the British pound. Since mid-February it dropped 5.9% to the Euro and 8.5% to the dollar. No surprise that financial interests are donating to the campaign to stay in. Both J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs have financially supported the "Britain Stronger in Europe" campaign, and Morgan Stanley is considering doing the same. While Brexit supporters argue that Britain is held back by Europe, and that it could soar as an open economy that continued to trade with the EU and all around the world, reality promises to be different. If Norway and Switzerland are a guide, the EU would allow free market access to its markets only in return for adherence to the same rules eurosceptics dislike: free movement of people and a big payment to its budget. Outside of the EU Britain would be on the sidelines, nominally independent, but still constraint by rules it would not have any role in formulating.
French President Francois Hollande warned Mr. Cameron that "I don't want to scare you, I just want to say the truth: There will be consequences in many areas, in the single market, in the financial trade, in development, in the economic development between our two countries." Let's face it, a Brexit outcome of this referendum would affect the future of Europe and the global order. Britain is the EU's second largest economy, it has a powerful military, and it exerts outsize influence in global affairs. A Brexit means abandonment of the EU by one of its most important members, while losing its biggest military power and most significant foreign policy actor would seriously weaken the EU. Dutch historian Dirk-Jan van Baar, in a column published in De Volkskrant of February 26, assesses the situation as follows: "This will be the first time that a member state leaves the EU, a premiere which will attack the "irreversibility" of the European Union. Once started, the decline can pick up speed. Once the rot is visible the deterioration can't be reversed. David Cameron will go into history as the assassin of the EU, a cowardly variant of Gavrilo Princip, the Serbian student who in June 1914 fired the deadly shots in Sarajevo." He concludes: "By demanding more and more exceptions and privileges the Brits have overplayed their hand, and tested the elasticity of the European project to the extreme. Anyone with a functioning brain understands that the EU is finished if the British approach becomes the standard."
Britain's financial sector is not the only group attempting to affect the outcome of the referendum. When London Mayor Boris Johnson threw his support behind the campaign to leave the EU, followed by 6 of Cameron's 29 ministers, he highlighted the political dimension of the debate. Mr. Johnson, a member of Prime Minister Cameron's Conservative Party, is widely expected to challenge Mr. Cameron for his job if the referendum blows up in his face. Internationally, the EU has become an increasingly important part of the West's foreign and security policy. Without Britain it would be more difficult for the EU to pull its global weight. No wonder therefore that Vladimir Putin supports the Brexit movement, and populist parties in France, The Netherlands, Italy and elsewhere are watching the debate closely. In the U.S. a weaker Europe would feed the views of isolationists like Trump and Cruz who hold that Europe's institutions are unable to cope with the realities of the modern age and that border controls, protectionist trade policies, and a reassertion of national sovereignty are essential to deal with the chaos of the outside world.
Right now polls predicting the outcome of the June 23 referendum are all over the place. Some show that Britons favor leaving Europe by a two-to-one margin, others have the split fairly even, while some polls show the "stay in Europe" camp leading by 10%. We still have a little over three months to go. A Brexit would be a seismic event. Coupled with all the other challenges and crises Europe is experiencing, this has the potential of developing into a tsunami.
No comments:
Post a Comment