XUE Li(Professor for IWEP/CASS) and CHENG Zhangxi(post-doc for IWEP/CASS)

Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

What does Brexit mean for the UK? According to my fieldwork in the UK in September, the general views of the British public can be divided into two parties.The elites are worried. In their opinion, the UK will take many years to recover from the impact of Brexit which makes the UK head for weaker and even autistic. Yet they have not consensus over the second referendum. The grassroots on the other hand generally support Brexit. They believe that the Channel Tunnel immigrants are simply burden to the UK, and the UK contributes a lot more than it takes from the EU. Whilst hating the orders from Brussels, they insist on the fate of the UK needs to be held in own hands, and firmly believe that one more referendum will only see more Brexit supporters.

Historically speaking, unlike Japan – the eastern island country of Eurasia who long adopts a “self-contained” approach, the UK has always maintained close ties with the European continent. Not only its religions and races come from the European continent, but it also economically close to Europe and politically part of the European royal family network. The Queen Victoria is also broadly known as the “European grandmother”.

In order to understand the relationship between the UK and the European continent, the Hundred Years’ War perhaps is a useful beginning. The 116-year war ended in 1453 in the loss of Calais – the last stronghold of the England in the European continent. Since then, the England turned its spearhead of external expansion to the British Isles and the seas on the one hand,and conceived a new strategy towards the European continent on the other. In 1534, Henry VIII broke up with the Roman Curia and “established” the Church of England (COE, Anglican Church). He did it mainly for remarriage. Afterwards, religious difference between COE and Catholic keeps much less than that between COE and Lutheranism-Calvinism for quite long. Mayflower story is a good instance to present difference. However, his behaviour actually triggered off the process of the construction of English identity. To strengthen the Anglican Church, Henry VIII promoted the development of business and industry through expropriating Catholic land and property, supporting industry, commerce and overseas expansion.

In 1588, defeating the Spanish Armada in the Battle of Gravelines laid the confidence and personnel foundation for the rise of the England’s Royal Navy. Its navy afterwards dared to fight, and even launched an attack to the Spain Armada. Meanwhile, England supported France and the Netherlands—then Spanish main rivals in the Continent. At this stage, the England made clear of its continental strategy: balance of power with a primary doctrine “aligning with the weak”. One hundred years later, the rapidly growing bourgeoisie and new aristocracy successfully practiced the Glorious Revolution in 1688 and thus prevented the restoration of Catholic forces. Economic development combined with “laissez-faire” and humanitarian environment gave the Britain the opportunity to take lead in the industrial revolution in the 1760s, which in turn led to a significant increase in its power, and consequently enabled British Navy to defeat a combined Spanish and Dutch fleet in the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805. Kingdom then built up a comparative advantage in the global expansion of the European powers. Through the efforts of the 19^th century, especially the Victorian period (1837-1901), the UK entered a glorious age. Base on its worldwide colonies, it was widely known as the “empire on which the sun never sets”. Accordingly, the England’s political system originated from Magna Carta may spread to the world and still cast its global influence today.

It is worth mentioning that the UK is never a true empire. After 1876, the full title of the Queen Victoria was “Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Empress of India”, not “Empress of Great Britain, Ireland and India”. The then Prime Minister Disraeli, who managed the bill, was definitely sure that the bill would be vetoed by the Parliament if he proposed the latter, which was obviously not in line with the UK’s constitutional practice.

During 1815-1914, a so-called European Centennial Peace period, the Splendid Isolation only existed between 1880 and 1903. Between the two World Wars, the UK actively got involved  European affair through Appeasement Policy.

After the Second World War, the UK insisted to maintain the “Anglo-American special relationship” on the one hand, and it applied to join the European Community since 1961 to prevent from being marginalised in Europe on the other. The UK had not joined EC until 1973 due to two vetoes from France, the membership have benefited the UK in many ways, especially in the service sector where the UK has distinctive advantages. Take the financial industry as an example, if the UK did not join the European Community, the EC(later EU) would inevitably cultivate its own financial centre. This will seriously deteriorate the status of London as one of the top three of global financial centres based on the role of European representative, for the City of London will fail to attract thousands of financial elites from the European continent. And what is more, its own financial elites will flow to EU. It is hard to imagine that the contribution of the UK service industry to GDP can reach around 75% today.

EU membership influenced the UK so deep that Brexit will perform as a surgery of “human separation”. It will affect the UK much more than the EU. The EU will make good use of it.

It is hard for the British government to hold another referendum without a guaranteed success. May’s cabinet has to carry on implementing Brexit.

However, the UK will not become isolated and even autistic because of three reasons. First, Brexit is a peaceful split-up in some fields, not a break-off of diplomatic relations. Second, grassroots may influence the outcome of the referendum, but decision-making and implementation of foreign policy depends on elites and major industrial interest groups. Most of them oppose Brexit and will try hard to minimise its impact. Those elites who support Brexit beforehand, are either keeping quite at the moment, or not coming up with a better Brexit plan. And third, when the consequences of Brexit are fully demonstrated, the grassroots will eventually find out Brexit is of less advantages than disadvantages to them and thus turn to requiring strengthening the relationship with the EU.

In short, UK’s autism would be prevented by the resultant force(合力) of historical connections, policy-making and enforcement, policy consequences even if it left the EU,.

 This piece was published on GLOBAL TIMES on January 9, 2019.

The published version：http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1135113.shtml