By Syed Qamar Afzal Rizvi.
The verdict of the Brexit’s referendum is out. With exception of cosmopolitan London’s no to leave– espoused by Scotland and the Northern Ireland, the rest of the British voters have decided to leave the decades old UK’s partnership with the European Union- a decision that will unveil far reaching global effects, particularly for Britain, Europe, and the United States. The vote counts for ‘Leave’ have been 51.89 against those of the ‘Remain’ that are 48.11. This could affect UK Passport Renewal, and make relations with Europe problematic.
The point in time when the UK would secede from the EU, including its institutions as well as agencies, and once again become an independent sovereign nation would be precisely two years after the result of the referendum in favour of a UK withdrawal from the EU. The withdrawal agreement would also have to be ratified by Parliament – the House of Lords and/or the Commons could vote against ratification, according to a House of Commons library report.
It adds: “If the Commons resolves against ratification, the treaty can still be ratified if the Government lays a statement explaining why the treaty should nonetheless be ratified and the House of Commons does not resolve against ratification a second time within 21 days (this process can be repeated ad infinitum).”
The Leaving criteria
Negotiating for the EU would be a team nominated by the Commission and approved by the Council. Article 50 requires any withdrawal agreement contain both a deal for the withdrawal of the member state and a framework for a post-withdrawal relationship with it. This whole deal would have to satisfy the remaining EU member states through a vote in the European Council, and receive the support of the European Parliament.
This timetable arrangement for Britain to secede from the EU is in keeping with the stipulations contained within the Treaty of Lisbon (2009. This stipulation will be activated after notification of a nation state’s decision to secede from the EU, in which there will be a two year period which constitutionally obligates the EU to negotiate a free trade agreement (FTA) with a withdrawing member state, and arrange the terms of such an agreement and the specific features of the arrangement in preparation for the member state after the two year period.
This official notification of the UK’s intention to secede from the EU should also be supplied to Britain’s economic and geo-political partner nations and organisations, such as Britain’s partners in the Commonwealth; the President of the United States; the Heads of State and Government of European countries and other nations; and to the Secretaries-General of the United Nations (UN), the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the world Bank amongst others.
Impact on Asia and Australia
Britain has made a concerted effort in recent years to boost its involvement in the politics of Asia, knowing the growing wealth of China is tilting the global balance of power to this region.
But Britain without Europe will be a weaker actor in Asia.
For a long time Australia’s relationship with Britain had drifted into the realm of nostalgia, a matter of symbolism rather than strategy. But renewed British engagement with our region, arresting a decline from the days of Empire, presented Australia with a familiar partner to share perspectives, intelligence and goals.
Europe’s grand economic experiment is gradually evolving into a deeper relationship for a shared outlook on the world. This internationalism makes intuitive sense, as collectively, Europe has immense weight as one of the world’s largest economies.
Australia could lose influence if Britain exits the European Union.
With Britain inside the corridors of Brussels, there was also chance to shape views. British influence helped in the decision last November for the European Union to start free trade negotiations with Australia.
This allowed Australia to jump ahead of a push by other countries, notably Latin American nations, for their own deals.
Impact on Europe & related institutions
An EU without Britain might be a more united union that functions better. It might also become more divided, with a Brexit unleashing centrifugal forces that unravel the EU. It might also become more divided, with a Brexit unleashing centrifugal forces that unravel the EU.
A Brexit could also have significant implications for NATO, wider European politics, transatlantic relations and Europe’s position in the international system. It is concerns over such implications that will shape the way countries such as the USA, Russia or emerging powers will view a Brexit. A Brexit that added to Europe’s divisions and security weaknesses, or turned it inwards would be of serious concern to Washington D.C. A focus in UK political debate on US-UK relations distracts from how geopolitical thinking about a wider transatlantic relationship will shape the response of the USA to a Brexit. The context within which a UK withdrawal takes place could therefore be another period of considerable EU institutional change, naval-gazing and tense relations between individual leaders and national elites.
Any institutional naval-gazing would also be the result of the EU needing to make changes to its own institutions and procedures to fill the gap left by Britain. The EU would face the never-easy task of negotiating changes to the voting system used for making decisions in the European Council, a reallocation of seats in the European Parliament, changes to staffing quotas, and increases in budgetary payments to make up for the loss of the UK’s large net contribution (£8.5 billion in 2015).
When combined with possible changes to the Eurozone, a Brexit could add to shifts to the EU’s balance of power and changes to the EU’s policies and outlook. If the UK and other non- EU members thrived and the Eurozone continued to struggle, then Britain’s withdrawal could trigger centrifugal forces leading other member states to question their membership and commitment to integration, in turn stalling integration and beginning a process that unravels the EU. The key here is likely to be Germany. In writing about the potential for the EU to disintegrate, Douglas Webber notes that the EU has never faced a ‘crisis made in Germany’, the EU’s driver, paymaster and indispensable nation.
What that crisis might be is not clear, but a Brexit that combined with another crisis in the Eurozone or Schengen could strike deep into the EU’s heart leading both Germany and other members to question their membership. Any such ‘domino theory’ by which a Brexit makes other EU members states question and abandon their membership or commitment to integration, has to be set against the likelihood of another domino effect within the EU should the UK secure a renegotiated relationship that provokes envy elsewhere. Other states could then demand concessions, creating the aforementioned EU ‘a la carte’.
The impact on EU’s power geometry
The centre of power in the EU could also shift. Germany’s already strong position could be further strengthened with implications for the Franco-German axis. Britain has sometimes played a role in this bilateral relationship. France could be left facing an EU where the centre of gravity has shifted further eastwards and where Germany’s ‘culture of restraint’ and preference for geoeconomic thinking over the geopolitical, comes to shape the EU’s international standing. However, Germany might also be left feeling uneasy at the withdrawal of an ally that has helped it push an economically liberal, free-market agenda. The political and geographical centre of the EU could shift eastwards and southwards. Some member states may gain from a withdrawal, seeing it as a chance to enhance their position within the EU.
Impact on the UK politics
The European Question is not simply about whether to be or not to be in the EU; it is more about tensions within the UK’s party politics, changing constitution, identity politics, political economy, responses to globalization and place in a changing Europe.
Impact on the USA & Nato
Speaking alongside British Prime Minister David Cameron in London in April, Obama called the referendum “a matter of deep interest to the United States because it affects our prospects as well. The United States wants a strong United Kingdom as a partner. And the United Kingdom is at its best when it’s helping to lead a strong Europe.” But U.S. officials have also stressed that whatever the result of the vote, it will not change U.S.-U.K. relations. State Department spokesman John Kirby said last week, “We don’t anticipate anything changing the special relationship that we have with the U.K.” But the commander of the U.S. Army in Europe, Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, warned on the BBC that if the EU begins to become unraveled, there “can’t help but be a knock-on effect for the NATO alliance.”
