Brexit? – PLSC 359: Global Governance

International Government Organizations make up part of what I think of as “Global Governance,” because these groups are in effect a conglomeration of already-existing states that come together to create a larger cooperative entity. Each participant loses autonomy in entering such a collective, but gains the support of other member nations. At the same time, the added responsibility to each of the member states and the need to conform to rules which might not be advantageous make some countries uncomfortable and unwilling to continue the partnership.

Let us take the example of Great Britain as a part of the EU. With the influx of refugees and immigrants coming from countries in the Middle East (one of the more discussed origins these days being Syria, due to the violence and hardship presently occurring there), some people in Britain are unhappy with certain EU measures, like the idea of each member country taking a certain percentage of refugees. One of the complaints is that Britain cannot support this influx, and there has been talk of a “Brexit,” or a “British Exit” from the EU.

The challenge of the EU is to figure out how to make sure each member is contributing, without overextending anyone’s resources, which would make their membership a detriment to their participation. What would happen if the Brexit did occur? What if it did not? These two articles might help to start thinking about the different aspects of this decision. Try to find others news reports that could add to the conversation!

Here is an article about the impact a Brexit would have on certain British businesses, especially ones who have large markets within the European Union:

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32689167

Here is another article, not about the Brexit, but about other measures Britain is hoping to take to reduce the amount of money spent on people who come to work in the UK:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35521250

Petra Formankova says:

February 21, 2016 at 5:31 pm

This post caught my attention as there has been some news regarding the Brexit recently. However, I must say that I slightly disagree with some of your claims, so I started thinking about the causes of the possible Brexit.

First of all, in the first paragraph you say that “each participant loses autonomy in entering such a collective”. I think that we should be very careful and mind the choice of the terminology as it is very important that when a country joins such an organization, it does not lose autonomy, it only loses a part of its autonomy which it exchanges for other benefits that the organization offers. Otherwise, no country would join such an organization.

Second, I feel like you concentrate too much on the issue of migrant quotas and that you perceive them as the most important cause of the Brexit even though you say that it is one of the British complaints. If the problem of quotas was to make a member state leave the EU, the EU would have fallen apart by now. Britain is not the only country complaining about the migrant crisis. The quotas adopted by the Ministers of the Interior in September 2015, several countries voted against the quotas or abstained. However, the quotas and the influx of immigrants aggravated the populations of most countries, there has been massive protests or even attacks on the detention camps. For example, Hungary has built a 4 m tall and 175 km long fence on the border with Serbia to prevent the flow of refugees. Furthermore, Slovakia, soon joint by Hungary, took the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union to press charges against the quotas. The Czech Republic, who also voted against quotas, was considering to join them but ultimately decided not to. But there is a great anti-migrant mood all over Europe and even countries like Germany and Austria who initially welcomed immigrants are now overwhelmed.

Moreover, Britain is one of the countries that has always been dealing well with immigrants. As the Ambassador of Great Britain H. M. Jan Thomson stated, Britain is not involved in the disputes over the quotas as it is not a part of the Schengen area. The general approach of British people since the beginning of the crisis has been positive, arguing that they are a wealthy country and that they will help as much as they can. She also mentioned that Britain is used to a great influx of immigrants and is successful in integrating them in their society. Also, Britain is not bound by the quotas at all as it was offered, along with Ireland and Denmark, to opt out of the quota scheme.

In my opinion, the Brexit is connected with multiple problems, many of them are rooted in history. Britain used to be a great empire separated from the Continental Europe and always trying to not get caught in the Europeans problems and wars. Britain was not a member of the emerging European Union and when it ultimately decided to join the organization, its application was denied twice by France. Even now, Britain wants to stay different. It is not part of the Schengen area, it did not adopt Euro, people still drive on the left side of the road…

Therefore, the British people might see many reason to exit the EU and it is hard to determine which one is the most important. Still, people realize that the membership brings them many benefits. On Saturday, February 21, David Cameron announced a referendum which will take place on June 23 and in which people will decide whether to stay in the EU or leave. What will most probably be the result? Will the outcome be similar to the one of the referendum on Scottish independence?