By Amy Davidson Sorkin
There is something poignant about the image of Prime Minister Theresa May, of the United Kingdom, being greeted by Chancellor Angela Merkel, of Germany, on Tuesday, in Berlin. The deadline for the United Kingdom to crash out of the European Union in a No Deal Brexit—that is, without basic rules or the shock absorber of a transition period in place—is currently Friday, April 12th, at 11 p.m., three days away. In London, officials in May’s government are engaged in tense and somewhat desperate talks with the Labour Party and its leader, Jeremy Corbyn, to come up with a compromise that could allow the withdrawal agreement that May negotiated with the E.U.—the only deal available—to make it through Parliament. (It’s been rejectedthree times.) But May is using one of those days to meet with Merkel and, in the afternoon, to fly to Paris, to see President Emmanuel Macron. She needs to: the U.K. is out of time and needs an extension, which would be its second. That can only be granted unanimously, by all the other twenty-seven members of the E.U., whose leaders will meet in Brussels, on Wednesday, to consider whether they should do so—or whether they should just let the U.K. go over what is, after all, a cliff of its own making, and move on with its own business. Merkel is seen as tending toward the first option, which is why May is likely asking for her help. Macron has openly advocated the second, which is why May needs to ask for his restraint.
At every stage of Brexit, it has been hard to tell what the U.K. actually wants, and that is true of the length and terms of another extension, too. On Friday, May wrote a letter to Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, asking for an extension until June 30th—a date that the E.U. had specifically advised her not to ask for, and had rejected when she nevertheless did ask for it a first time, in March. Instead, it gave her until April 12th, or, if Parliament approved her deal, until May 22nd. All the mooted dates have to do with elections for the European Parliament, which are being held from May 23rd to the 26th. April 12th was the deadline for the British government to call those elections, which May did on Monday, over loud objections from some in her own party, who were angry at the very idea of affirming the U.K.’s connection to an institution it is trying to leave. May’s government pointed out that, if the U.K. is still legally a member of the E.U. on the date of the elections, but the polls are not open, British citizens could sue the government for denying them their voting rights. The E.U. is also concerned that the legitimacy of the European Parliament as a whole would be put into question. For one thing, June 30th is just before the newly elected European Parliament would convene, and, if the U.K. is no longer going to be a member, its seats are supposed to be redistributed to other countries. Parties in those countries would like to know how many candidates to run.
There is also a broadly shared fear that the European Parliamentary campaign will descend into a squabble about Brexit and nationalist populism, and not only in Britain. As my colleague Elisabeth Zerofsky has written, the European Parliament can be an unexpectedly fervid place. Fringe parties across Europe have gained toeholds there—a notable example is the U.K. Independence Party, and its European Parliament member, Nigel Farage, who has been a brash spokesman for Brexit. (Farage has said that he will nevertheless run again if elections are held.) Leaders such as Macron want to turn the discussion into one about a vision for Europe. Those who value the E.U. hope that its Parliament will grow into an institution of ever-greater democratic legitimacy. They don’t want Brexit to be a trauma or toxin that affects that development.
Why would May ask for a date that she has been told won’t work? A common theory is that she thinks that Brexiteers, particularly those in her Conservative Party, will be angry if she asks to stay longer, so she is hoping that the E.U. will ask her instead. This is the time-consuming, middle-school logic of Brexit. Also, as a condition for another extension, the E.U. had asked her to present a credible, precise plan for how the U.K. will reach a resolution. But May, in her letter to Tusk, just cited her “open invitation” to Parliament to work with her, and the talks that her government is holding with Corbyn.
From a certain angle, those talks have some promise. On paper, the official Labour and Conservative positions are not that far apart, and they might be resolved with a commitment to a customs union—that is, aligning external tariffs and certain other trade rules. (The E.U. has said that it is open to considering such an arrangement.) But May and Corbyn are only truly united in not having their parties fully behind them, since each party is itself divided on Brexit. Some Tories are horrified that May would even talk to a “Marxist” like Corbyn, let alone opt for a customs union, which they see as leaving the U.K. with a Brexit so soft that it’s not Brexit any more; some members of her cabinet will almost certainly resign no matter how the talks turn out. And many Labourites are outraged that Corbyn hasn’t demanded a second referendum, which could lead to calling off Brexit. To truly push May to a compromise, Corbyn would have to reveal what he actually wants on Brexit—something he has avoided doing.
The danger is that there could be an accidental No Deal Brexit—one that happens just because time runs out on everybody. On Monday, around 11 p.m.British time, M.P.s gave their final approval to the Cooper-Letwin Act, a piece of legislation that its supporters claim will really, truly stop a No Deal Brexit. (It was rushed through both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, and got a late-night royal assent from the Queen, a necessary formality.) Operating under the terms of the act, Parliament, on Tuesday, endorsed the June 30th date. But the Act only requires May to ask for an extension; it does not, because it cannot, require the E.U. to give her one.
This is why May was on planes to Berlin and Paris, and on the phone with other European leaders. Last week, there was, reportedly, some support in Brussels for a “flextension” scenario, suggested by Tusk, in which Britain would get a year-long extension, with the option to leave sooner if Parliament approves the withdrawal agreement. The message, in short, is: I’ve got to run and take care of something, but I have my phone and you can reach me if anything important comes up. Even that seems too much for Macron. The latest reports in the British press suggest that diplomats in Brussels are working on the terms of an extension that would run until the end of the year, on the condition that the U.K. carries through on the European Parliament elections. But, until the leaders meet on Wednesday, in Brussels, several dates are still possible—even June 30th, or sooner. The U.K. may also be asked to accept constraints on its drawn-out membership, such as abstaining on key votes. Lest this restriction seem overly cautious, Jacob Rees-Mogg, a leader of the hard-Brexiteer faction in Parliament, has been tweeting in a to-the-barricades tone: “If a long extension leaves us stuck in the EU we should be as difficult as possible. We could veto any increase in the budget, obstruct the putative EU army and block Mr Macron’s integrationist schemes.” It’s a transparent attempt to undermine the extension talks and thus force a No Deal Brexit. But it’s also a reminder that May can only promise so much, because there’s a good chance that she won’t be Prime Minister for much longer. Someone like Rees-Mogg’s friend Boris Johnson, the former Foreign Secretary, who spends his time making wild statements about European tyranny while failing to properly fill out his parliamentary financial-disclosure forms, might be, instead. (Johnson has apologized for the problem with the forms, if not for his rhetoric.) So might Jeremy Corbyn.
May already pledged, as part of her third effort to get her deal through, to resign before the “next stage” of the Brexit negotiations, but that concession was devalued by the widespread view that she might lose her job anyway, perhaps through a no-confidence vote. Here, too, is a contrast between May and Merkel. The latter has given up her position as the head of the Christian Democratic Union, and has said that she won’t run in the next federal election, in 2021. But her preferred successor as Party chief is in place, and the Brexit crisis has demonstrated her powers as a leader—during, for example, the negotiations around the first extension. No one would say the same of May.
Given all that, why should the E.U. give May an extension? The answer, as with so many questions having to do with Brexit, is Ireland, which would be the state, other than those in the U.K., hardest hit by a No Deal Brexit. The sudden apparition of a hard legal border between Northern Ireland, which is part of the U.K., and the Republic of Ireland would threaten the Good Friday peace accord—the most intractable element in the Brexit negotiations. A No Deal Brexit would also, to take just one industrial example, be disastrous for Irish dairy and beef businesses; animal products need to be subject to inspections when they enter the E.U., and installations and processes for such checks aren’t in place. Macron and other leaders have said repeatedly that they will not “abandon” Ireland. An extension, in other words, won’t really be for the U.K.’s sake or a tribute to its prestige.
Last Thursday, Merkel was in Dublin, conferring with Leo Varadkar, the Irish Prime Minister, about preparations for a No Deal Brexit, and while there she met with people who had been affected by the Troubles, the thirty-year period of violence that the Good Friday accord brought to an end. Merkel, who grew up in the former East Germany, appeared deeply moved. “I myself come from a land that was divided by a wall for many years,” she said. “I know what it means when walls fall, when borders vanish.” She added, as she has said before, that she would work “until the last hour” to prevent a No Deal Brexit. There aren’t so many hours left.
No comments:
Post a Comment