Search

Begin New Search Topic Brexit Political Geography United Kingdom

51. The future of our shared island: a paper on the logistical and legal questions surrounding referendums on Irish unity

Author:
Colin Harvey
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
The debate on Irish Unity has intensified. Brexit is only one part of this, as more people question the merits of the existing constitutional arrangements. The focus is now shifting to constitutional conversations about how the island is shared in the future, and the timeframe for what is often referred to as a “border poll”. The difficulty remains that there are several unanswered questions about the process, as many interventions understandably concentrate on the merits of this option. We believe that the debate around the referendums must be normalised as momentum builds towards setting out a precise timeframe. In this paper our intention is to examine logistical and legal questions that have thus far been neglected. This paper is therefore drafted with two principal considerations in mind: How can referendums on Irish unity be achieved? How can they be won?
Topic:
European Union, Constitution, Brexit, and Referendum
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, Ireland, and Northern Ireland

52. Brexit, British people of colour in the EU-27 and everyday racism in Britain and Europe

Author:
Michaela Benson
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
This paper foregrounds an understanding of Brexit as unexceptional, as business as usual in Britain and Europe. It reports on original empirical research with British People of Colour who have settled elsewhere in Europe, to bring into view an original perspective to understandings of what Brexit means to Britons living in Europe, and to consider what these testimonies offer to emerging social science research on Brexit. The authors argue, focussing on the testimonies of British People of Colour living in the EU-27 offers a unique lens into how Brexit is caught up in everyday racism, personal experiences of racialization and racial violence, and longer European histories of racialization and racism. Importantly, these experiences precede and succeed Brexit, taking place in both Britain and other European Union countries.
Topic:
Politics, Brexit, Society, and Racism
Political Geography:
Britain, United Kingdom, and Europe

53. UK-born children of EU nationals in the UK: historical, national and local perspectives

Author:
Nando Sigona
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
This research shows that the share of births to at least one EU parent has been increasing since the mid-2000s. In 2016 it was 12% of all births in England and Wales, 13% in Northern Ireland, and 10% in Scotland. The study also shows a change in the main countries of birth of EU parents, where the share of births to mothers and fathers from 2004 accession countries has increased.
Topic:
Children, European Union, Citizenship, and Brexit
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales

54. Brexit where have we got to and where are we heading?

Author:
Anand Menon
Publication Date:
03-2019
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
Speaking at the Keele World Affairs lecture series, Professor Anand Menon looks at what has happened so far, the possible routes the deal could take in the coming months and what impact a deal could have for the UK.
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

55. Dividing Britain? polarisation and fragmentation trends in the UK

Author:
Bobby Duffy, Tim Bale, Maria Sobolewska, and David Wiletts
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
-Bobby Duffy, Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Policy Institute at King’s College London -Tim Bale, Deputy Director of The UK in a Changing Europe and -Professor of Politics at Queen Mary University London -Maria Sobolewska, Professor of political science, University of Manchester -Lord David Willetts, former science and universities minister
Topic:
European Union, Brexit, Political Science, Public Policy, and Polarization
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

56. Battle of Ideas: Brexit: a revolution by or against the establishment?

Author:
Lisa Mckenzie, Anand Menon, Daniel Moylan, and Waterfield
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
Can Brexit be understood as representing a genuinely revolutionary moment in British history, or are there much deeper, longer-term trends that explain the current moment? Speakers included: Lisa Mckenzie, Durham University Professor Anand Menon, UK in a Changing Europe Daniel Moylan, Urban Design London Bruno Waterfield, The Times
Topic:
European Union, Brexit, Referendum, and Elites
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

57. Consensus for Action: Towards a More Effective EU Sanctions Policy

Author:
Tom Keatinge and Emil Dall
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy
Abstract:
Sanctions are a key tool of foreign policy but have taken on greater salience over the last 20 years as governments have reached for leverage in negotiations but foregone the use of force. During this period, the alignment of the design and implementation of sanctions by the European Union and the United States has, on the whole, been an article of faith as the transatlantic allies have pursued mutual foreign policy objectives. Yet despite the consistency of objectives, the bureaucratic structures, technical mechanisms, and processes by which the European Union and the United States design and implement sanctions differ significantly. These differences—always present—have been amplified by the current stresses in transatlantic relations and may be further exacerbated when the United Kingdom leaves the European Union in March 2019. The reasons behind these differences are myriad and touch upon both structural matters (such as the construction of the European Union and the manner in which its member states can enact policy) and more philosophical matters, as the focus on due process and human rights in EU sanctions policy demonstrates. But given the importance of transatlantic ties and cooperation in managing the sorts of problems that sanctions are usually developed to address, it is important for both the United States and the European Union to work through these differences. Toward that goal, this paper provides a European perspective on US sanctions activity, where there are differences in approach, in particular EU attitudes toward secondary sanctions put in place by the United States, and it explains the complications that may result from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union. The paper concludes with recommendations for how the European Union can address the challenges it faces in achieving an effective sanctions policy. In short, it recommends the following: The European Union should work through its structural issues to create a more decisive and effective EU sanctions policy. The implementation and enforcement of sanctions at the member state level must be improved, and a formal EU-level sanctions body is needed to independently monitor compliance with sanctions across the European Union. A clear mechanism for ensuring the coordination and effectiveness of EU-UK post-Brexit sanctions policy must be established. The global centrality of both the European Union’s economy and the United Kingdom’s financial sector combine to present a powerful sanctions force and must thus be closely coordinated to ensure maximum effectiveness. The European Union should directly address the matter of human rights exemptions by incorporating it as a key consideration of the EU-level sanctions body identified in the first recommendation. The European Union should establish a clear channel for human rights exemptions throughout the lifetime of sanctions regimes. The European Union should consider its options to address the ability of non-EU actors to abuse EU-originating supply chains and financial services, which represents a considerable sanctions implementation vulnerability. Finally, though US-EU misalignment on sanctions is growing, policy makers must stay seized of the necessity to maintain and improve communications and coordination to prevent current schisms from having serious long-term effects on international security.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Human Rights, Sanctions, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, and Europe

58. European Strategic Autonomy and Brexit

Author:
Peter Round, Bastain Giegerich, and Christian Mölling
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
The United Kingdom is among the few European Union member states with full-spectrum military and defence-industrial capabilities. Through Brexit, the EU could lose 20% of its military and 40% of its defence-industrial capabilities, and thereby its influence and credibility as a security actor. The pertinent question is how to arrange the UK’s future participation in European defence.  Decision-making on defence matters in the international arena requires skilled diplomacy and the momentum to carry plans through the scrutiny of multiple parliaments. The EU risks inaction through inertia without the UK’s soft powers, placing strategic decision-making at risk. The Union needs the UK’s military enablers, but only until it can deliver its own. In addition, with the UK’s ‘special relationship’ with the United States suffering, London’s influence is on the wane.  More autonomy for the EU is possible within a framework of political partners that reaches beyond the EU, incorporating actors such as the UK, and also Norway.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, Europe, and North America

59. Fostering a Defense-Industrial Base for Europe: The Impact of Brexit

Author:
Torben Schütz and Christian Mölling
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
The European defence technological industrial base (DTIB) represents a core element of European defence and deterrence – it is a strategic asset. Strong defence industries multiply the deterrent effect of the armed forces. However, national industries in most countries cannot offer the full range of supplies needed by national armed forces. Despite the fragmentary nature of its industries, Europe collectively has most of the range of defence-industrial capabilities, enabling, at least notionally, security of supply for EU and NATO partners. The UK’s share of defence-related turnover among European companies is almost 40%. The UK also makes defence-industrial contributions to many multi- national projects. While Brexit does not remove the UK’s defence-industrial base from the wider European environment, it will complicate its involvement. The EU’s growing role in defence-industrial matters, through regulation and financial resources, is shaping the wider European DTIB. At the same time, the Union’s ambition as a security actor creates an obligation to ensure that European partners outside the EU can contribute as effectively as possible to European defence and deterrence. In order to do this: The UK, EU institutions and EU governments should work toward as close a common understanding as possible that safeguarding a sustainable, innovative and competitive European defence industry is in the strategic interests of all political partners in Europe. The UK and its EU partners should establish politically and structurally significant flagship armament projects. Such projects would support a shared objective, namely to consolidate the still fragmented European DTIB, and in the process make it more competitive. A European Defence Industrial Review should be launched to help identify key industrial branches and companies that are of structural relevance to the European DTIB, and therefore to European defence and deterrence. For future regulations related to the defence industry, the EU should take a ‘systemic view’, i.e. also take into account how a regulation affects European partners and contributors outside the EU.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, and London

60. Opportunities for Defense-Industrial Collaboration after Brexit

Author:
Douglas Barrie
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
The United Kingdom should seek to continue to support defence-technology cooperation with the European Union and partner states across all military domains. Avoiding, or at least minimising, the second-order effects of Brexit on wider defence cooperation with European partners will be easier if the UK is directly involved in the EU’s defence-technology initiatives. Specific opportunities present themselves across the military domains: Pursue cooperation in the air domain with regard to future combat- aircraft technology. While collaboration at the platform level is unlikely in the near term, exploring common R&D in key systems, such as radar, propulsion, avionics, sensors and weapons, is achievable. In the land domain, explore partnership with France and Germany on participating in the development of a next-generation main battle tank. Collaboration on applicable technologies at the component and sub- system levels should also be encouraged. This could include armour and armament R&D, and laser weapons. In the maritime domain, support cooperation in the air-defence arena, including the use of laser weapons for ship self-defence, and the use of naval vessels for ballistic-missile defence. In the space domain, examine potential cooperation on next-generation communication satellite requirements, and wider collaboration on geospatial intelligence.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, Brexit, Maritime, and Space
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, France, London, Germany, and Brussels