In a century’s time, the history of Brexit will be studied just like the history of the United Kingdom in the first half of the nineteenth century is today. After getting involved in the campaign to oust Napoleon from power and participate with the rest of the great countries of the moment in the Congress of Vienna, the British leaders decided to cast off and turn on themselves in practically a good part of the 19th century, except for a few exceptions such as the Crimean War or support for Greek emancipation against the Ottoman Empire. One of the protagonists of that campaign was British Foreign Minister George Canning. The figure of Canning and his trajectory, together with that of the current Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, have certain things in common which do not go unnoticed by British analysts.
The British had planned to leave the EU on March 29. Brexit has already cost the office of two prime ministers and Boris Johnson has no intention of repeating the path of David Cameron or Theresa May. Although his initial promise was to announce the imminent rupture at the end of October, a date agreed with the EU, the majority with which British Conservatives control the Parliament is not sufficient to allow the current prime minister’s intentions to move forward. In fact, it should be remembered that May’s resignation was the result, above all, of the setbacks suffered since the beginning of the year by the rest of the political representatives. Johnson has greater popularity on British streets, but the balance of power in Parliament has not changed. In fact, there is even the possibility that Labour will file a motion of censure against him in September.
In view of this situation, we must analyze the three possible scenarios with a view to October 31. The first would be for the UK and the EU to agree on a new exit agreement. The EU has already shown its unwillingness to resume negotiations that lasted more than two years and ended in November with May’s backing. The second scenario could be the activation of the so-called no-deal Brexit. Although this is the option that Boris Johnson publicly seems to want, neither the British economic agents, nor the parliamentarians who rejected it before Theresa May, nor any of the Community authorities really want it.
What would be the consequences of a no-deal Brexit? The first and most feared is the establishment of a new border that would divide the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland like that which caused a lot of bloodshed for decades. One way to avoid this border is through what is known as the ‘Irish backstop agreement,’ which are rules agreed in the Theresa May era with the rest of the EU Member States to guarantee the circulation of goods and services under Community subjugation. The current British leader strongly rejects this measure, along with the parliamentarians who successively turned their backs on the former prime minister.
The so-called no-deal Brexit would have more pernicious effects, initially, for the British than for the rest of Europe. The evolution of the pound in the currency markets, where it has worn significantly against the euro, can be seen. If the United Kingdom makes this move, from November 1 onwards it will cease to belong to the European single market and, therefore, products from any Community country would be subject to the tariff rules to be defined with the United Kingdom. And the other way around, too.
Another of the great fears is how a break with the EU might affect the UK’s status as a single, sovereign entity. Several voices have been heard from places such as Scotland against any non-agreed divorce about having another referendum for independence. Against all this, the only advantage that Brexit has, in addition to the political profitability for figures such as Johnson, is the saving for the British public coffers which would reach 10,000 million euros in contribution to the Community budget.
However, the consequences of a hard Brexit cannot be overlooked either from the perspective that the main consequences should be borne by the United Kingdom itself. An initiative of this kind would certainly drag the economies of the euro area as a whole and would therefore deserve an exercise in political wisdom at the EU level rather than one of contempt for Johnson and his constant buffoonery.
A third scenario would be the announcement of early elections before October 31, which would allow conservatives to obtain the largest parliamentary representation in the polls and give Boris Johnson a free hand to carry out his initiatives.
The electoral advance option could be strengthened if Boris Johnson realizes the parliamentary weakness in which he finds himself. Today, with his messages, he is trying to unite all the sentiments in favor of Brexit around his figure. If it turns out well for him, he will get some indispensable support to face Brussels. With less than 100 days to go before the Brexit deadline, there is every indication that we will still be discussing the same issue after October 31.
