Le Quickie Divorce is fantasy – but we could renew our vows and lead Europe instead
As part of a speech in London in March this year, Germany’s powerful finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble urged Britain: “Go on and lead Europe”.
The Leave camp is hitching post war resentment of Germany’s success to their wagon - alongside other unpleasant cargo. But why they think Germany’s dominance in Europe is a reason for Brexit is puzzling. The reasoning seems to be something like a disappointed child stomping off with mutterings of ‘I can do better’ when their one-time bully outshines them in class.
The aim of the EU was to harness Germany and France to each other to prevent further conflict, and it was together they designed the EU’s parameters – with France dominating its early choreography and – perhaps unfortunately - creating the institutional structures to mirror its own. When Britain joined, it added a new perspective, but it was only under Tony Blair, and with the Nordic and ex-soviet-bloc countries’ arrival, that that perspective started to gain ground. The emergence of Germany as the pre-eminent force in Europe is relatively recent, partly due to its own post-unification economic success, but equally as a result of France’s waning influence since enlargement, and Britain’s inability to decide if it’s in or out. For all his apparent current EU enthusiasm, Cameron’s pandering to his Eurosceptic colleagues weakened the UK’s hand still further in Brussels.
Having found itself the most powerful voice in Europe, Germany’s leadership on areas outside the Eurozone is often tentative, particularly on the geopolitical agenda. And its unwillingness to be involved in military operations - however laudable - is not always helpful. Most of Germany is simply not particularly comfortable with their dominant position and, as Schäuble indicated, would be happier to share it: “I promise you: Germany will support Britain all the way if Britain decides to reform the EU from within to make it more competitive and responsive”.
Leave is simply wrong to say that the UK would be punished for the referendum if we Remain. The relief would be enormous and the welcome warm. And if we play our hand well, the UK could go on to forge a powerful alliance with Germany to strengthen and reform the EU and balance France’s sometimes overzealous instincts towards social and trade protectionism.
On the other hand, if we wake up on 24th June to a Brexit (although many of us will not have slept at all), we will be giving up that opportunity and – in David Miliband’s words – voluntarily undertaking “unilateral political disarmament”. Leave says we will be rewarded by our EU allies with a magnificent and quick exit deal. Not so - Le quickie divorce is fantasy. Looking harder at what our exit might look like, I have gone from being mildly anxious to absolutely terrified.
The EU’s overriding concern after a Brexit, would be to keep the rest of the EU together and prevent others leaving and the disintegration of the bloc. And the fears are justified - a recent Ipsos-Mori poll showed that the populations of half of the other EU member states also favour an in/out referendum in their country. There will be a closing of ranks to avoid this – France’s finance minister, Michel Sapin, recently predicted that the EU countries would come closer together after a Brexit. Not surprising as Marine Le Pen has promised a Frexit referendum within six months of her election as President – and most other member states have their own far right movements saying similar things. The most effective way to protect against wider break-up will be to show unambiguously that the UK will not profit from Brexit. Those who don’t recognise this need to look back at the similar dynamics already on display – albeit to a lesser extent - in the negotiation of David Cameron’s ‘deal’: no-one wanted the UK to leave, but a too generous package could have led others to demand the same.
This whole atmosphere will be amplified by both Germany and France’s presidential and parliamentary elections in 2017. Marine Le Pen and her referendum promise will hang over the negotiations and the EU will have to show French voters that the UK is paying heavily for their choice. Under these circumstances, there is no possibility that the UK could hope to achieve any significant level of access to the single market without continued freedom of movement and making significant budgetary contribution. EU leaders have already made this clear but Leave is blocking their ears and closing their eyes.
Gove and Johnson have also told us that BMW will ensure we can continue to buy their cars tariff free – it’s in Germany’s interest after all. Dream on. Even if BMW could persuade Germany against the wider interest of preventing EU disintegration, the multitude of parties which must agree the exit package will drown out any single industry voice. The new EU treaty article governing the exit of a member state (Article 50) gives every Tom, Dick and Harry a say on the package – but not Britain. Yes, Britain will be excluded from the formal negotiations and its votes redistributed amongst the other member states. The Economist likened the process to a divorce application made unanimously by one party, the provisions of which are unanimously dictated by the other. And the trade deals to replace membership have to be unanimously agreed, including by all member states’ parliaments. Oh, and the European Parliament has to approve the deal with its 751 members! Negative trade balance be damned, BMW’s voice will be swamped by a myriad of other interests.
And Leave should not forget that it has been the UK which has nuanced the protectionist instincts of the EU – without our voice in the formal discussions, we will see that protectionism used against us.
A further factor will likely complicate the process still more. Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond have made it clear that Brexit would precipitate a new referendum on Scottish independence - as long as Scotland vote as expected to Remain – and it is one they would almost certainly win. The SNP would wish to achieve that process in time to detach themselves from the rest of the UK’s exit – allowing them to remain in the EU seamlessly without a re-application. Difficult to see why even Spain could oppose Scottish membership under these circumstances, and Greenland and Algeria have served as precedents for bits of member states leaving when other bits have remained (albeit the larger bits in those cases). But it will make the unstitching of the seems even more fiddly and lengthy work.
A second Scottish independence referendum is almost certain following Brexit.
All this is very far from the picture Leave is painting of the exit process. Daniel Hannan, MEP, says the EU Treaty ‘obliges the EU to reach a trade deal with a departing state within two years’. Yeah – le Quickie… Nothing of the sort – if an agreement is not reached in two years the UK would either cease to be a member - but with no agreement on future trade - or an extension to the process would have to be agreed. Considering all the parties involved in the decision, lengthy extension is inevitable. And Johnson’s claim just after throwing his lot in with Leave, that a vote to leave would open the way for a new negotiation and even a hint at a second referendum, is weirder still. On that, Article 50 is clear: once procedures are started, there is no way back. The objective of the Treaty drafters here was to avoid Article 50 being used as a way to negotiate changes. And there will be absolutely no mood for any informal deals before Article 50 is triggered with Le Pen waiting in the wings.
Quite simply, Article 50 is a one-way ticket to the door and those thinking about voting leave would do well to listen to Volker Kauder, Parliamentary Leader of Germany’s CDU party and Merkel ally, when he warned unambiguously: ‘out means out’. The process will be long and complicated, and it will ensure that out is very cold indeed. But the alternative is there – Go on and lead Europe.
