By Andrew Hammond
The historic U.K.-EU trade deal in December 2020, was heralded by Boris Johnson as "getting Brexit done." Yet, the wide-ranging processes unleashed by the U.K.'s 2016 referendum are only beginning to play out, rather than ending, a year on.
The agreement is the first trade negotiation in history where barriers went up, rather than down, and is only, therefore, likely to be a partial solution to future U.K.-EU economic collaboration. For instance, the deal does not cover the services sector, which accounts for 80 percent and 70 percent, respectively, of the U.K. and EU economies.
Part of the challenge was that the deal was struck in just eight months, during a pandemic, with a bare-bones agreement being the almost inevitable result. Therefore, U.K. negotiations with the EU may need to continue for years to fill in at least some of the gaps in what one former U.K. minister to Europe Dennis MacShane has called "Brexiternity."
Johnson brushed over this, and also pledged that the agreement would lead to a positive reset between London and the EU-27. However, the deal has instead triggered 12 months of turmoil with relations between the two sides rarely so poor ― exemplified just five months after the agreement was struck when Royal Navy vessels began shadowing French ships near Jersey in a row over fishing licenses.
Little surprise therefore that more than 60 percent of voters now believe Brexit has gone badly or worse than expected. The Opinium survey last week also found that even 42 percent of people who voted "Leave" in 2016 now have a negative view of the way things have turned out.
Multiple missteps from both sides have led to the current tensions. The United Kingdom has threatened to break international law with its Internal Market Bill.
Moreover, less than a month after the deal was agreed, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen threatened to impose a U.K. vaccine export ban. Facing delivery shortfalls and suspecting the United Kingdom had co-opted EU supplies of the AstraZeneca jab, she ultimately climbed down after much fury.
Tensions will continue into 2022 with the U.K. government under pressure from the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), in power in Northern Ireland, to override parts of the protocol. Meanwhile, President Emmanuel Macron, running for re-election in France while also holding the rotating Presidency of the EU club for six months, is likely to ask the European Commission to soon begin legal action against the United Kingdom over post-Brexit fishing licenses.
Yet, beyond these disputes, other processes are brewing that show how hollow Johnson's slogan is of having "got Brexit done." The net impact of these could have contrasting implications for the EU and United Kingdom.
Whereas the next few years may result in a stronger, centralized union of EU states, despite significant continuing disagreements between these same nations, the opposite may be true across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Brexit has exacerbated tensions over the U.K.'s unity, including putting Northern Ireland back at the forefront of U.K. politics. Johnson's decision to allow a new border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom has angered much of the unionist community, and there is growing speculation as to whether a referendum might be held on Irish reunification.
The possibility of such a vote, let alone the outcome, remains far from certain. While London remains committed to the unity of the United Kingdom, and Dublin to the cause of Irish reunification, there are political and economic challenges for both sides with these contradictory objectives.
While Northern Ireland was relatively muted as an issue during the 2016 referendum, the prospect of Brexit leading to Scottish independence was actively debated. The Scottish National Party's continued political strength means either a new independence referendum or growing tensions with the rest of the United Kingdom are likely during Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon's remaining period of office.
By contrast, how the EU changes because of Brexit could be the most important ― but often overlooked ― outcome of the U.K.'s vote to leave. Plus, with the United Kingdom no longer in the Brussels-based club, the EU-27 has already made in 2020 and 2021 some significant steps toward greater federalism.
One example of such steps is the new 750 billion euros coronavirus recovery fund, a major political milestone in the post-war history of European integration, which saw the continent's presidents and prime ministers commit for the first time to the principle of jointly issued debt as a funding tool. Going forward, a broader range of EU policy could change, post-Brexit, including tax harmonization, which could potentially take further steps forward now without the U.K. "blocker."
Taken together, these steps are why the implications of Brexit could be significantly different for Brussels and London. While both unions are under stress, the 2020s could see an increasingly federal EU while the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom is under increasing threat.
Andrew Hammond (andrewkorea@outlook.com) is an associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics.
 |
The agreement is the first trade negotiation in history where barriers went up, rather than down, and is only, therefore, likely to be a partial solution to future U.K.-EU economic collaboration. For instance, the deal does not cover the services sector, which accounts for 80 percent and 70 percent, respectively, of the U.K. and EU economies.
Part of the challenge was that the deal was struck in just eight months, during a pandemic, with a bare-bones agreement being the almost inevitable result. Therefore, U.K. negotiations with the EU may need to continue for years to fill in at least some of the gaps in what one former U.K. minister to Europe Dennis MacShane has called "Brexiternity."
Johnson brushed over this, and also pledged that the agreement would lead to a positive reset between London and the EU-27. However, the deal has instead triggered 12 months of turmoil with relations between the two sides rarely so poor ― exemplified just five months after the agreement was struck when Royal Navy vessels began shadowing French ships near Jersey in a row over fishing licenses.
Little surprise therefore that more than 60 percent of voters now believe Brexit has gone badly or worse than expected. The Opinium survey last week also found that even 42 percent of people who voted "Leave" in 2016 now have a negative view of the way things have turned out.
Multiple missteps from both sides have led to the current tensions. The United Kingdom has threatened to break international law with its Internal Market Bill.
Moreover, less than a month after the deal was agreed, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen threatened to impose a U.K. vaccine export ban. Facing delivery shortfalls and suspecting the United Kingdom had co-opted EU supplies of the AstraZeneca jab, she ultimately climbed down after much fury.
Tensions will continue into 2022 with the U.K. government under pressure from the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), in power in Northern Ireland, to override parts of the protocol. Meanwhile, President Emmanuel Macron, running for re-election in France while also holding the rotating Presidency of the EU club for six months, is likely to ask the European Commission to soon begin legal action against the United Kingdom over post-Brexit fishing licenses.
Yet, beyond these disputes, other processes are brewing that show how hollow Johnson's slogan is of having "got Brexit done." The net impact of these could have contrasting implications for the EU and United Kingdom.
Whereas the next few years may result in a stronger, centralized union of EU states, despite significant continuing disagreements between these same nations, the opposite may be true across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Brexit has exacerbated tensions over the U.K.'s unity, including putting Northern Ireland back at the forefront of U.K. politics. Johnson's decision to allow a new border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom has angered much of the unionist community, and there is growing speculation as to whether a referendum might be held on Irish reunification.
The possibility of such a vote, let alone the outcome, remains far from certain. While London remains committed to the unity of the United Kingdom, and Dublin to the cause of Irish reunification, there are political and economic challenges for both sides with these contradictory objectives.
While Northern Ireland was relatively muted as an issue during the 2016 referendum, the prospect of Brexit leading to Scottish independence was actively debated. The Scottish National Party's continued political strength means either a new independence referendum or growing tensions with the rest of the United Kingdom are likely during Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon's remaining period of office.
By contrast, how the EU changes because of Brexit could be the most important ― but often overlooked ― outcome of the U.K.'s vote to leave. Plus, with the United Kingdom no longer in the Brussels-based club, the EU-27 has already made in 2020 and 2021 some significant steps toward greater federalism.
One example of such steps is the new 750 billion euros coronavirus recovery fund, a major political milestone in the post-war history of European integration, which saw the continent's presidents and prime ministers commit for the first time to the principle of jointly issued debt as a funding tool. Going forward, a broader range of EU policy could change, post-Brexit, including tax harmonization, which could potentially take further steps forward now without the U.K. "blocker."
Taken together, these steps are why the implications of Brexit could be significantly different for Brussels and London. While both unions are under stress, the 2020s could see an increasingly federal EU while the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom is under increasing threat.
Andrew Hammond (andrewkorea@outlook.com) is an associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics.
![[ANALYSIS] China's ban on Micron tests Washington-Seoul alliance](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/1785a57b07ae45a7b7db49fdf4acd720.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] Long-awaited extension of Korean Pavilion at Venice Biennale to be pushed forward](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/d8d5090875824ce08a90bb2c5a8f8c05.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
