Search

Begin New Search Topic Brexit Political Geography Europe

201. EU 2017: We Will Rise to the Occasion

Author:
David O’Sullivan
Publication Date:
09-2016
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Council of American Ambassadors
Abstract:
This may sound like a gloomy time to ponder Europe’s future, particularly in print, but as a veteran of many ups and downs in the EU’s history, I believe it’s important to go beyond the headlines and take stock of what is being done to relaunch the European Union in a way that is both sustainable and better understood by everyday people. It is this gap between the perception and reality of what the European Union is and does that poses perhaps the biggest internal challenge to European integration.
Topic:
Political stability, Europe Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
Europe

202. Brexit's Impact on the EU Institutions: Immediate implications and possibilities for reform

Author:
Teija Tiilikainen
Publication Date:
10-2016
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
The direct implications of Brexit for the EU’s political system will be less significant than the indirect consequences, opening up possibilities for reform. The treaty rules on a qualified majority in the Council might need to be reconsidered due to Brexit, which will also lead to a major reshuffle of the EU’s critical political groups in the European parliament after the 2019 EP elections. The political pressure to consolidate the EMU in terms of strengthening its governance and its own fiscal capacity may grow as a part of the general reform process following on from Brexit. If the treaties are reopened, principled amendments to the institutions and decision-making of the common foreign and security policy as well as further steps within the common security and defence policy are very likely to occur. Any internal reform project shouldn’t compromise the unity and coherence of the EU any further, however, as it is currently highly exposed to both internal and external pressures.
Topic:
International Relations, International Political Economy, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
Europe

203. Brexit and its discontents

Author:
Janko Bekić
Publication Date:
09-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)
Abstract:
In the weeks following June 23rd, the day of the historic Brexit vote, it seemed as if the United Kingdom was on the brink of dissolution. Exasperated by the prospect of Scotland being dragged out of the European Union against the clearly expressed will of its population (62 percent voted “remain”), Scottish First Minister and leader of the Scottish National Party Nicola Sturgeon announced the preparation of a second independence referendum, which – if successful – would sever Scotland’s ties with the UK, and keep it in the EU. Emboldened by SNP’s move, Sinn Fein’s deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland Martin McGuinness called for a border poll on the uni�ication of Ireland. His line of reasoning was the same as Sturgeon’s: the majority of voters in Northern Ireland voted “remain” (56 percent) and would not be forced out of the EU by English and Welsh “leave” voters. Less than two years after the original Scottish independence referendum Downing Street was faced with a new wave of secessionism and separatism. It was generally accepted that the surprising result of the plebiscite on UK’s EU membership might persuade a portion of the “no” voters from the September 2014 Scottish independence referendum to change their minds and tip the scales in favour of secession. Namely, a considerable number of Scottish “no” voters in 2014 opted for the continuation of the union with England precisely out of fear that an independent Scotland would have to exit the EU and renegotiate its admission into the club. SNP’s rationale after June 23rd was that these people would now naturally join the pro-independence camp and help it pass the 50 percent hurdle. However, polling conducted by YouGov during the summer showed that 50 percent of Scots opposed a new referendum on independence, while only 37 percent supported it. If a new referendum was to be held nevertheless, 54 percent would vote against independence and 46 percent in favour – a shift of only one percent point compared to the original referendum which ended with the result 55 percent to 45 percent.
Topic:
Europe Union, Brexit, and Autonomy
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, England, North Ireland, Scotland, and Wales

204. Plan B after Brexit – What Britain can expect negotiating a Swiss-type arrangement with the EU

Author:
Jacqueline Breidlid and Cenni Najy
Publication Date:
06-2016
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
For those wishing to see the UK exit from the EU, Switzerland has become a poster child, an example of how a country outside the EU can retain access to the EU’s internal market, thereby flourishing economically, and yet retaining its sovereignty and independence. But can a similar arrangement to that of Switzerland really provide a suitable alternative – a “Plan B” – for the UK’s relationship with the EU? With the referendum providing potential exit for the UK from the EU rapidly approaching, a Swiss-type plan B deserves some serious consideration. This paper examines the central claims made by those who see Switzerland as a model for the UK’s future relationship with the EU and argues that the Swiss model is no Holy Grail for the UK.
Topic:
International Affairs and Brexit
Political Geography:
Europe

205. Brexit and Baltic Sea Security

Author:
Riina Kaljurand, Tony Lawrence, Pauli Järvenpää, and Tomas Jermalavicius
Publication Date:
12-2016
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
The result of the UK’s June 2016 referendum on continued membership of the EU was unexpected and its consequences may be wide-ranging and grave. This report considers the impact of the UK’s exit from the European Union (‘Brexit’) on the security of Estonia, the Baltic Sea region and Europe more widely. Its focus is hard security – military security and defence. The UK is a defence and security actor of considerable prominence, able to contribute significant military capability to the organisations and operations in which it participates. It is, however, sceptical about the place of the EU in defence matters and has achieved a certain level of infamy for its perseverance in obstructing the further development of an EU defence dimension. One immediate consequence of the Brexit referendum result was a burst of ideas for further EU defence integration, which has led to an agreement on the first steps for implementing the EU Global Strategy in the area of security and defence. Not all member states, however, are enthusiastic for these ideas. Interviews conducted for this report with officials and researchers in the Baltic Sea states of Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden, and also in the UK found that interviewees believed that their countries shared with the UK approaches to security that would be harder to pursue after Brexit without the active support of the UK itself, and were largely sceptical about the need for further defence integration in the EU. In general, though, interviewees felt that the character of the European security environment post-Brexit is very difficult to forecast and the many factors that will contribute to shaping it are highly uncertain, complex, and intertwined. In these circumstances, scenario planning methodologies offer perhaps the best means of thinking about the future and informing policy decisions. The report thus identifies a range of possible post-Brexit scenarios as a vehicle for testing policies and identifying those likely to result in maximum benefit and minimum cost.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, Nordic Nations, and Baltic States