Hardships for the UK and the EU: To Each His Own

• 06.12.2015, 16:02
•  Europe,  World

The issue of the United Kingdom leaving the EU has become a matter of everyday discussions. Although PM Cameron and Germany's Chancellor Merkel seem not to lose any chance to secretly discuss some common matters, Merkel still leaves the issue of Brexit to the Union.

An idea recently expressed by Germany’s Chancellor provides everyone with some food for thought.  Merkel declared that the EU could consider amending its treaties as the price for persuading Britain not to leave. She added that if everyone wants to find a solution, they’ll achieve it. But does everyone actually want to find a solution? The main opponents to treaty changes are France and Poland. Both of them have their own reasons. Being a funding member of the EU, starting from the Coal and steel community France will not accept any rapprochements from the UK, which has never considered itself a full member of the Union. As for Pols, they oppose as their diaspora will largely suffer from the changes proposed by Cameron.

It is actually the EU that should deal with the issue. On one hand it is true that the EU cannot decide for Britain on holding a referendum or opting for Brexit. But on the other hand there is another issue to be considered. While voting for changes of the Treaty the EU 28 will be directed by the system called Qualified majority voting (QMV), which has come into force for several areas, including EU policy areas as asylum, immigration, border checks, culture, tourism and sport since November 1, 2014.

Qualitative majority means from now on passing a new law needs a majority of the 28 EU Member States (14 plus one), as well 65% of the population of the EU as a whole. Under these new rules, Germany’s vote carries more weight than for example Portugal, as Germany has a larger population. Accordingly, if 15 Member States with small populations agree to a law, but they collectively represent less than 65% of the population of the EU, the law will not pass.

At the same time, the Lisbon Treaty still contains Article 50, concerning states’ membership withdrawal. The Article states that in accordance with the country’s constitutional requirements it may decide to withdraw its membership.

Actually this new system mostly explains Cameron’s Europe tour, where he was trying to convince the states with largest populations that his offer could be rational. But in most of the cases it did not correspond to individual interests of the countries.

Another important factor in this EU-UK case is Scotland, which in a way gives a hand to London and fosters the implementation of UK's desires. Today, it seems that Britain has got an unexpected "ally"- Scotland, which is continuously announcing that if the UK chooses to leave the EU, Scotland will chose to leave the UK. By this act Scotland in a way urges Brussels to make concessions towards London, otherwise the choice of Scotland to leave will lead to strengthening of extremism and separatism in Europe, as well as leave UK without Scotland: which will bring to unpredictable consequences.

However, it is in nobody’s interests to leave the EU and Cameron’s policy is "yet another time trying to get what they want and make the Union work their way". It’s just the same policy of many years: although then the mechanisms for achieving this result were different, but the aim is the same. The UK has always been a country with high standards, it has always considered itself "different" from the 27 and has maintained its membership on special terms for years now.