Aye-Nay C'tain!
Update: Truth be told, this article was written before EU decision-makers were summoned to work during Christmas. We are all humans. Nonetheless, the main takeaway still holds even after 24 December, 2020 - it is beyond difficult to settle on a mutually beneficial framework once Article 50 has been triggered, so if a country does resort to this option, the default attitude towards the future should be no agreement after leaving.
The Godfather-saga has 3 episodes. Star Wars originally consisted of 3 episodes, now it reaches far beyond the 9 movies, including the animated TV series, spin-off movies and another gazillion add-ons to the Star Wars universe. Being a fan myself, that is great! But when a political saga spans that long without a (new) clear end in sight, I think it is far-far away from great.
When I started writing this piece about Brexit, I was trying to figure out where to start: with the (in)famous referendum of June 2016? Or the fact that the UK officially left the EU at the end of January 2020 and yet they still have not officially left? Or that what is definitely the endgame now looks a lot more complicated than Ross-and-Rachel in Friends? So, I decided to just stick to the last part of this saga and try to sum up what all this means and look ahead.
Brexit history
I remember very well the days after the Brexit referendum took place on 23 June, 2016. I mostly recall surprise, astonishment, disbelief, and uncertainty among acquaintances in the 'Brussels bubble'. Having just started my career few years before in the European Commission, I had no idea either what would happen...had I known, I would have still been wrong!
Over 4 years after the referendum, 3 Prime Ministers, 2 European Commission Presidents and countless hours of negotiations later, it seems obvious that the cliff-edge is unavoidable. Ever since Tim Barrow (the UK Permanent Representative - now Ambassador) handed over the Brexit notification letter on March 29, 2017 to then President (of the European Council) Donald Tusk, both parties have been continuously striving to come to a deal by the end of the 2 year period that was triggered. At that point, nobody knew what was ahead after that time will have elapsed. We still don't, but we can see how the past years went down: negotiations, extensions, uncertainties.
Any upsides?
If you ask me, there is one up-side to Brexit, and this gets overlooked a lot, unfortunately. Let us not forget the political and global context of the times when the referendum was held: up next were the French and Dutch elections with Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders showing strength and talking about respective referendums if they win. Remember when these 2 founding members of the European Union voted down the Constitutional Treaty, delaying reform processes until the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon in 2007? I do not want to make any retroactive predictions, but it is safe to say that a referendum on EU membership in these 2 countries would have stirred the European mothership to dangerous waters, bearing in mind the momentum generated by Brexit in some circles. Then there were of course the looming elections in the US, which has shocked the world. Now looking back, we can say that even a US Presidential term was not long enough to solve the Brexit issue.
And I think that is the important part. With all that has (not) happened, all the back-and-forth, negotiations, one thing has become crystal clear: Article 50 was introduced in the Treaty of Lisbon, to allow for members of the club to leave, but nobody knew how exactly this would work in practice - before that they could join, but not exit. And history has showed us that the only way it works is if a country is prepared and confident enough to leave without an agreement.
Very simply put (and I know this might be too much of a simplification) any agreement between a country wanting to leave and the European Union would be based on the minimum terms and conditions, embodied in the acquis communautaire. A country wanting to leave would sometimes like to diverge from standards it had so far adhered to. What happens then? It finds itself between a rock and a hard place: the EU will not lower its standards, but the country wanting to leave does not want to sign up to all the rules again that it was previously bound by (and was part of the decision-making process when they were adopted). And this holds for any area, be it fisheries or access to the single market. Any concessions a country would hope for are probably more difficult to get from outside than from inside (during the decision-making process). And this needs to be noted: the UK already had several instances of preferential treatment throughout its EU membership, including granting opt-outs from joining the Schengen area or ever having to adopt the Euro as its official currency - as well as the British rebate (that lowered the UK’s contribution to the EU budget).
David Cameron tried a similar route in February 2016. He negotiated the terms of a continued EU membership, but in the heat of an emotional campaign (on EU membership or sovereignty...), this fell on deaf ears in the lead-up to the referendum. After the resignation of David Cameron, Theresa May was pushing hard to implement the result. Seeing the potential economic and political consequences of Brexit (think also Global Britain), the number of Remain supporters started to rise quite visibly. But politicians usually cannot do U-turns, as that would mean a straight-out defeat…then Theresa May lost her majority at the early elections she called…but still managed to form a government…and by the way, who is the UK PM now? Right...maybe a U-turn back then would have helped to avoid the current situation.
What does the future hold?
But we are in the endgame now. What seems clear is that the EU has bended over backwards throughout the entire process to find an equitable deal with the UK: up until the very last moment - and even beyond that. I do not think that this separation would not hurt the EU as well. I think the proportion of the damage will be somehow the inverse to the relative populations: EU:UK = 450 million : 50 million people - it will hurt the EU 1, while the UK 9. It is no longer only a bitter and unaccounted for divorce. This is no longer about dividing the wealth or the custody of the children. This is about separating an organ from a body and trying to find a right host for this....and this did not work.
It is important to think back to the Scottish referendum that took place in 2014 on whether or not they should stay part of the UK. One of the principal arguments for staying was that being part of the UK gives them unrestricted access to the EU, which otherwise would most likely not be possible (due to veto threats from Cyprus, Spain, Romania, etc. in case Scotland tried to apply for EU membership as an independent country). One does not need to be an oracle to predict that over the next few years, there should be calls for another similar referendum, the outcome of which is not difficult to predict either. Even if Scotland cannot join the EU, they can negotiate an agreement for themselves (remember the rules they followed anyway as part of an EU Member State?).
Conclusion
Joining the European Union is not only a formal act of signing a Treaty. It goes way beyond that, which became visible once somebody tried to leave. Having seen all the downs and further downs of trying to leave the EU, I do not think anyone else will try a similar stunt. How difficult it is to exit could be a cautionary tale for wealthy European countries that you cannot just leave that easily after joining (think Iceland, Norway or Switzerland). But these countries already follow European standards in most areas - and apparently the costs of joining do not equal the benefits of having a say at the table on all issues throughout the decision-making process. And when it comes to enlargement, countries in the Western Balkans would be happy to adopt these rules - only if the EU would let them do so sooner.
Between Godfather II and III and the Star Wars saga original trilogy/prequel trilogy, a solid 20 years have elapsed...and I think this is how this saga will drag on. My 2 cents (looking decades ahead) is on new generations, new political leaderships: they will come and dust off the issue of EU membership in the UK and might try to accede again - but that would be a smaller UK (if a referendum in Scotland succeeds for instance) on worse conditions than Margaret Thatcher managed to bargain for. But for now, this saga has hopefully been scary enough for everybody to show that in spite of all quarrels, it is still better to be inside the clubhouse than to be anywhere else.