Daily Times

As things continue to settle down following the shocking verdict of the British voters, the effects of leaving the European Union (EU) are being mulled, and it is being hoped that this does not turn out to be a complete disaster. If there were any regrets on part of British voters over their decision then that could be gauged by the fact that hours after the result, internet searches inquiring what the EU is and what it means for Britain to leave it became highly popular in Britain. As the world looked at Britain with alarm and even pity, it seems that the British public began to doubt their decision. However, all of this borders on conjecture, and the fact remains that the vote was decisive, and Britain is now going to leave the EU. This move has certain big ramifications for not only Britain but also the EU.

The main point on which the Leave camp stressed on and which resonated with the voters the most — even adopting a certain degree of virulence — was the issue of immigration. This is in line with the xenophobia that is currently fuelling Donald Trump’s campaign in the United States. Some have viewed the vote on Brexit as the triumph of xenophobic forces in Britain along with its narrow brand of nationalism. This was because the EU was a project that aimed at regional integration, and transcending the artificial barriers created by the dominance of nationalism. However, it seemed that Britain’s history of cultural pride and even a certain degree of exclusivity, along with its distaste of sharing autonomy with the headquarters in Brussels, was able to overcome the visionary project that the EU espoused.

Britain’s departure from the EU immediately raised questions over the fate of Scotland, which largely voted in favour of remaining in the EU. The concerns were further heightened by Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon as she announced that a second referendum is “highly likely.” Of course, the concerns of Scotland are valid as it does not want to be forced out of the EU because of Britain. Furthermore, Brexit does not only affect Britain on a political level but it also is a substantial threat to the EU. This is because the option of leaving the EU has been made by Britain as a very real choice, and this could embolden other countries to follow suit. This especially applies to Eastern European states, which are facing their own issues in the EU, and if they choose to do so, the consequences could be far graver for the EU than the current case. This is because Britain did not adopt the Euro while the rest of the members of the EU did. Hence, the strain that it would put on the Euro if any of these countries choose to leave would be alarming.

The economic points of leaving the EU were used both by the Remain and the Leave camp during their campaigning, and this goes to show the degree of uncertainty that surrounds the whole affair. Of course, without special access to the European common market, Britain will not get the same terms in negotiations that take place between Britain and the EU. Britain would also now have to unilaterally negotiate trade terms with all those countries, with which it before enjoyed special terms because of its membership of the EU. Nevertheless, British exports to European countries are substantial, and it is unlikely that the EU would impose harsh restrictions on Britain in subsequent negotiations. Moreover, Britain would not have to pay its contribution to the EU budget, which was £13 billion in 2015 (not taking into account the £4.5 billion rebate), and this means that Britain would now have more funds to spend on itself. However, it remains to be seen whether what Britain gains here is not offset by the loss of business and the common market of the European Union. And as Britain gears up for new leadership in the fall, the steps that it would now take for this transition would determine its fate.*