U.K Testing the Tenets of Liberalism

Wall Street Journal
U.K.’s Cameron: U.K. May Have to Consider Whether to Remain in the EU
By: Jenny Gross

David Cameron stated, “The question is whether we would be more successful in than out [of the EU]?” Does this strike as a realist “move,” where the U.K is looking out simply for itself and its interests in hopes of increasing its power and dominance? It may appear as such given its supposed “threat” to exit the EU if they are not able to compromise and the use of the word “successful” and it implies power. Or is it more in line with the liberal school of thought, where there are number of other actors and interests at play driving decisions? Russet and Oneal would argue that, much like the formation of the EU itself, this is a display of self-interest working towards a non-zero sum game, leaving all parties better off together than alone.

The U.K has a list of four demands (reforms) for the member states of the EU, that if met with a “deaf ear” could lead to their potential exit from the EU. The demands are as follows:

1. Safeguard of the rights of countries not using the Euro
2. Ensuring national sovereignty from Brussels
3. Limiting the EU migrants access to welfare
4. Deepening the single market while cutting the red tape

The first reform the U.K proposes seems to be in a self-interested capacity, where they hope to ensure their own rights and place in the EU as a country using the Pound and not the Euro. This is a rational move by the U.K as they need confirmation of their security and future in the EU. The third demand is reflective of a clash of ideologies and values, as the EU is comprised of 28 member states, each with differing views on their role in the Syrian migrant crisis. Countries like Germany who are much more accepting of the migrants and providing refuge are in opposition to countries such as the U.K and Hungary who view their presence in the EU as a threat. This demand will surely test the EU’s ability to adapt and align their identities as to ensure its future stability (one without the U.K potentially). And finally, their request for increased free-trade without the increased regulatory actions of the EU (demand #4) appears to reflect a growing frustration within many EU countries concerning the bureaucracy preventing growth over the past decade.

I would argue that the U.K’s decision to engage in conversation with the EU reflects most accurately the liberal school of thought, where self-help and self-interest are structural (not processes like constructivists would suggest ) and inherent. Each state has concerns regarding their security, whether it is economic, political, or cultural. However, liberalism argues that although these are staples of the international system, there are ways to negotiate and mutually benefit. Although Prime Minster David Cameron’s remark “The question is whether we would be more successful in than out [of the EU]?” is reflective of liberalism entirely, where decisions regarding a nation’s security come down to a matter of cooperation (within the EU). The word “successful” I believe is a notion of state security and well-being, not power as realists might argue.

The U.K poses demands that many other EU countries have illustrated given their policies regarding migrants and their Single Market system. To say the U.K’s decision is purely realist, only looking out for themselves in a state of anarchy would be a huge oversight of the complexities regarding the current state of the EU and international scene where exogenous shocks such as migrant crises are rampant. I predict that there will indeed be a resolution to this issue and the U.K will remain part of the EU given the economic interdependence and similar values held by many of the member states regarding the issues they have brought to light.