Brexit: The Uncivil War
In view of a plenty of the literature appearing now concerning Brexit, A. Glenkross is one of the few scholars who analyzes its political reasons. As follows from the book, the main reasons which have led to the referendum on British membership in EU as well as to D. Cameron’s defeat were, firstly, the results of 2015 UK General Elections.
In late June 2016, a story wended its way through Spanish-language media about a baby born in Mexico whose parents decided to name her “Breksit,” after the heavily controversial vote by the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. The baby was apparently born in the state of Tabasco just hours after the referendum. The film then jumps to the referendum polling day on 23 June 2016, the announcement of the result and after a victory speech, Cummings quietly leaving the Vote Leave campaign office. HBO has dropped the first trailer for Brexit, starring Benedict Cumberbatch with a disturbingly realistic receding hairline. Cumberbatch plays the analyst behind the «Vote Leave» campaign that made aggressive use of social media, anti-immigrant racism, and outright lies about funding the National Health Service.
A. Glencross states that on a strategic level, UK’s withdrawal from the EU has a number of important ramifications, many of them potentially favourable to French interests. France’s permanent UN Security Council seat could gain a new legitimacy as the voice of the EU on the international stage. The absence of a British presence in the EU’s decision-making bodies would make trade and regulation policy more protectionist in line with the instincts of French governments of both Left and Right.
In the fifth chapter «The unfinished business of Brexit» consequences of voting for leaving EU are considered. The author analyzes two most challenging issues for the Great Britain. First, how to preserve access brexit news to privileged trading terms with the Common Market, while not being a member of EU. Second, how to preserve Britain as a single state as Scotland did not vote to leave the EU and did not want to leave the EU34.
The president of European Counsel Jean-Claude Junker has confirmed that «the concept of ever-closer union allows for different paths of integration for different countries»32. The grudging acceptance that a unilateral opt-out from unwanted single market legislation is impossible explains why getting the EU to focus on economic competitiveness was another Cameron priority. The UK government went into the renegotiation harbouring a legitimate concern that the Eurozone may act as a block within the EU, using its majority in the EU Council to pass laws, primarily for its own interests. As a result, financial regulations could be imposed on the City making it less globally competitive, thereby hurting a key UK economic interest. Lastly, there were the demands surrounding individual rights.
Glencross examines similarities and differences between the 2016 and the 1975 referendums. He argues that the British position towards integration — something greater than the mainstream political trend (possibly, he means eurosceptics), was «not just nationalist populist as with the Front National in France», it was https://finprotect.info/gryadet-referendum-o-vyxode-britanii-iz-es/ a position in which «the possibility of withdrawal from the EU» was «openly discussed and real readiness was expressed «to actually devolve this decision to the public vote»16. A. Glenkross assumes that D. Cameron was confident of winning the referendum on the basis of a pragmatism and bean-counting evaluation.
- The reason for Britain to vote on EU membership, as A.
- EU heads of states and leaders of EU institutions were equally taken aback by this unprecedented reverse for European integration.
- statement such as «a pragmatic and utilitarian foreign policy stripped of a normative commitment to a European ideal of ever closer union»15.
- Cameron’s government strategy and reflection on the «political philosophy of Brexit».
While most Americans are pretty unfamiliar with the specifics about the run-up to that election, there are some frightening similarities to stories we’ve been hearing a lot in the last year or so in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal. But at the same time as Parliament and political parties in Westminster address the international ramifications of the Brexit referendum, there is a simultaneous domestic constitutional crisis to resolve as the vote on referendum brought to the fore once again the issue of Scottish independence. The future of Northern Ireland is also not certain as the majority of its population has voted against leaving the EU.
Thirdly, the presence of the organized and well-funded political opposition in the form of the Party of independence of the United Kingdom so that there was a merge of nationalist Euroscepticism with anti-elites брексит новости mood. Nevertheless, as follows from the analysis of results featured in the book, D. Cameron managed to get some concessions and changes in all the issues which were put under negotiation.
As a result, Britain tried to withdraw EU from closer integration towards federal union getting the nickname of «the strange partner». The author emphasizes that D. Cameron’s negotiations with EU prior to the referendum were «the valiant final attempt to make it work for Britain, but for the majority of the British voters EU has not proved sufficient flexibility». Thirdly, the growth of political influence of Euroscep-tics led to the vote on EU membership. Lack of reforms within EU which could be suited with the British played into the hands of Eurosceptics who claimed that the EU was unreformable and heading towards federal union.
«Consistently large trade deficit of the Great Britain is compensated by equally large capital inflows. This means financial service — namely the City of London — are politically very influential and dominate the economic aspect of relations with the EU»13. The author’s argument that the nature of British exceptionalism within the EU has no nationalist roots could be accepted with no dispute. Before the opening credits, a frustrated Dominic Cummings is shown at a future fictional public inquiry trying to explain that they have no understanding brexit история of the way in which technology is going to reshape politics, and therefore society, in the United Kingdom. After the opening credits, Cummings rejects an offer in 2015 by UKIP MP Douglas Carswell and political strategist Matthew Elliott to lead the Vote Leave campaign due to his contempt for «Westminister politics», but accepts when Carswell promises Cummings full control. Political strategist Dominic Cummings leads a popular but controversial campaign to convince British voters to leave the European Union from 2015 up until the present day.
However, to answer these questions authentically could be possible only by analyzing governmental documents on political strategy as well as final results of negotiations with EU regarding terms of the UK leaving. In 2017 the government stated its position in two White Papers and reports on the preliminary results of negotiations by the government members.