A Short History of Brexit summary

There are a lot of words you can use to describe the British Empire, and “controversial” is definitely one of them. Some Britons are ashamed of their imperial past; others look to it as a golden age and persistent source of national pride.

Even so, after World War II the UK knew imperialism was on borrowed time and transferred power to its colonies fairly peacefully. Many countries who gained their independence from the UK became Commonwealth – a group of equal and independent nations tied together by a shared history. Trade flourished among these countries, which benefited everyone.

When we last looked at the UK, it had just excluded itself from a customs union with the three other largest European economies. What’s more, it denied itself a valuable position of leadership within Europe. Its politicians recognized this and frantically began trying to improve the situation.

To level the playing field, the British began talks with many European countries – including those in the EEC – about establishing a different organization more suited to their interests: the European Free Trade Association (EFTA).

In the current Brexit negotiations, the British have often been accused of wanting to have their cake and eat it too. This philosophy has been named “cakism” by some sharp commentators. But this isn’t just the attitude of today’s UK government – it’s true of past ones, too.

When it became clear that the UK couldn’t keep its Commonwealth preferences inside the EEC’s customs union, the country set up a different free trade area that gave it both cheaper European trade and the ability to offer advantages to its old empire.

In politics, timing is everything. The UK entered 1973 as a newly minted member of the EEC – but its timing couldn’t have been worse.

That’s because a global recession was about to hit, taking the wind out of every nation’s sails.

So we’ve examined the UK’s wider history when it comes to its position in Europe. The election of Conservative David Cameron in 2010 is the link between that history and Brexit.

In 2004, the EU expanded into eastern Europe, bringing high levels of immigration to the UK. This caused a backlash among some of the population, and capitalizing on this situation was the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) – an anti-EU, right-wing political movement led by Nigel Farage.

The British are traditionally known for their pragmatism and levelheadedness, and their country has traditionally been known for its political stability. Although they’ve always had mixed feelings about the EU, the decision to leave was a political shock felt around the world. How can it be explained to future generations?

The truth is, there are many explanations. The first relates to the 2007-2008 financial crisis.

As we’ve seen, UK politicians have a history of trying to negotiate “cakist” deals. Perhaps worse than this, though, is the current British negotiation position of uncertainty. How can you negotiate with a partner that doesn’t know what it wants?

Many assumed that Britain would seek a soft Brexit. This would involve a less-radical departure from the Union by keeping Britain closely tied to EU institutions. In concrete terms, a soft Brexit would mean the UK remaining inside either the Single Market or the customs union.

When the Republic of Ireland (ROI) gained independence from Britain in 1921, the island of Ireland was divided in two. Most of the island was Catholic and craved independence, and these twenty-six counties became the ROI. But the protestant population in some northern regions wanted to remain in the UK, and these six counties became Northern Ireland (NI). This divide led to decades of violence, as Catholic republicans and Protestant unionists fought each other over the future of the island.

Thankfully, a peace agreement between the groups was signed in 1998. The Good Friday Agreement, as it became known, ended decades of bloody conflict. The UK and ROI agreed that, if the people of Northern Ireland decided they wanted to join the ROI, the region could do so at any time. They also agreed that anyone born in Northern Ireland was entitled to both British and Irish citizenship, and would not have to choose between them.

So both sides were committed to an invisible Irish border, and this led to an EU proposal for an Irish backstop. This seemed to be the only way to avoid a hard border in Ireland and respect most of May’s red lines.

But it involved erecting border controls within the UK, to control immigration and inspect goods – and this was controversial at home. To prevent a revolt within her party, May proposed that the backstop be temporary and UK-wide: if part of the UK had to join the customs union, the whole country would join until a frictionless UK-EU trade agreement could be negotiated. In July 2018, May summoned her ministers to the prime ministerial country house, Chequers, to work on this new negotiating stance.