Brussels has celebrated its unity in negotiations with Britain, and it has successfully demonstrated the pain of leaving the E. U. But at what cost?
BRUSSELS — Confronted with the ever more chaotic and confusing debate in Britain over Brexit, frustrated European Union officials have decided to sit tight until British democracy can provide some kind of answer to what the country really wants.
It could be a long wait. While leaders of the various Brexit factions in Parliament have agreed to talk, they have given no indication that they are willing to budge from entrenched positions.
And as the debate drags on in Britain — possibly toward an ugly ending — doubts are beginning to creep in about the bloc’s negotiating stance.
When the negotiations over Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union began, there was concern in Brussels that a unified Britain could exploit divisions in the bloc to gain an advantage in negotiations. When the opposite occurred, with the Europeans holding together and the British cracking into multiple antagonistic factions, there was a detectable note of self-congratulation.
But with Parliament’s overwhelming rejection of the deal worked out so painfully with Prime Minister Theresa May, and Brexit set to take effect in just 10 weeks, the smugness has been replaced with a growing recognition that it was perhaps a Pyrrhic victory, a kind of catastrophic success.
“Catastrophic success is accurate, in that the general meltdown of the British political system highlights to everyone what a bad idea it is to leave the European Union,” said Nathalie Tocci, director of Italy’s Institute of International Relations. “That is success, but catastrophic because at this point there’s no obvious way out of this.”
A no-deal exit would be the worst possible outcome, not just for Britain but for Brussels, Ms. Tocci said, even though a set of smaller deals covering matters like aviation and customs have been prepared just in case. But, she added, even a British decision to support a withdrawal plan that kept stronger ties to the European Union or one to have a second referendum “could still have bad and even catastrophic consequences for the E. U., given the delays involved and the imminence of the European elections.”
Those elections for a new European Parliament, set to begin May 23, are considered a crucial test of populist and euroskeptic sentiment on the Continent. An extended Brexit debate and the subsequent uncertainty “would be spun in different national contexts, creating risks and unpredictability that most incumbent governments don’t want to raise,” Ms. Tocci said.
If Brexit is not completed by then, there would be serious institutional confusions. No one in Britain can imagine campaigning for a seat in the European Parliament, but the body would be illegal if Britain is still a member state but does not have legislators, said Fabian Zuleeg, chief executive of the European Policy Center, an independent think tank in Brussels.
