Brexit can be defined as a crisis in the United Kingdom and European Union relations. The drastic transformation occurred between the vote in June 2016 and the United Kingdom’s formal exit from the European Union on January 31, 2020 (Davies, 2022). This research pertains to the aspects that Brexit left a profound political and economic impacts. The UK had a difficult financial situation by leaving a single free market. New customs tariffs, certificates of inspection, and the added volume of bureaucracy increased trade costs for the UK enterprises, forcing them to search for alternative markets (Flach, 2022). Therefore, the Brexit critics claim that the UK government bought sovereignty over the borders at the high cost of surrendering its influence in Europe (“Brexit: The pros and cons of leaving the EU”, 2022). However, Brexit should be perceived as uncertain event that challenged the balance of power in contemporary European politics by wide array of political and economic outcomes. The UK has significantly lost economically due to declined gross domestic product (GDP) and low exports and imports while gaining politically by sense of independence without interference by the European Union (EU) countries.
This study will evaluate scholarly sources and periodicals that consider Brexit’s impact on the European Union’s internal stability and the strength of European integration. For instance, Hobolt et al. (2022) argue that Brexit may affect European integration in several ways. Firstly, the potential economic success of the post-Brexit UK may lower citizen support for EU membership. Secondly, the Eurosceptic politicians may find inspiration in the UK example and mobilize the European nations against the supranational authority of the European Union. Lastly, pro-European messages of economic risks appeared less powerful than the pro-sovereignty rhetoric (Hobolt et al., 2022). Given these findings, Brexit is perceived as a crucial benchmark, a true test for the European Union’s political resilience.
The political impacts caused by the UK leaving the European Union span not only within the nation but also across Entire Europe. Hobolt et al. (2022) affirm this with several statements that depict the situation around the continent after this ground-breaking exit. According to him, the political success associated with the UK past its exiting from the EU might lower support from the members. This scenario is in line with heuristics such as attitude formation and change. In this case, the people will predict their country’s state based on the available data and activities. For instance, the country’s rank as regards their ideologies and stance amidst ideals tells how they will manage outside the European Union. According to Hobolt et al. (2022), the people thought the UK would find itself at the crossroads of whether to cling to ideologies from the West or the East to preserve power. However, their even more resilience in matters that require keen decision-making made most people associate more with it than with the European Union.
Moreover, UK’s exit from the EU must have empowered the activists who are ever oppositely opinioned about the Union’s ideas and deeds. According to Hobolt et al. (2022), Eurosceptics may find it easy to convince their followers to ditch the full integration under the European Union. The main reason is that they know associating with the UK could be more beneficial than having to stick to the Union. Viewing this scenario from more diverse perspectives shows that having the UK as a close partner as far as the world is concerned places them in a better decision-making position. They do not need to keep up with the extreme conditions and regulations imposed by the Union on them. It is interesting to realize that this skeptical view is mostly based on economic levels in the respective countries.
It means that countries whose Euroscepticism will upsurge are those who see their nation’s economy as thriving. An example is Sweden, where around 80% of their opinion toward this Brussel-based institution is positive (Dhingra & Sampson, 2022). Thanks to the EU, they think their economy is stable and in stable condition. Nations like Poland, France, and Italy have experienced a drop in the number of positively opinionated toward the European Union. However, the highest negative vote comes from the rural areas and people with inadequate education. This skepticism results from the ultimate mobilization against the EU backed by these nations.
There is a massive decline in the morale of the pro-Europeans compared to the pro-Sovereignty individuals. This political is crucial in the survival of the UK past its withdrawal from the larger community. Many under the pro-European league argued that this nation would barely survive a day outside the Union. They attributed this claim to the fact that the UK derived its economic and political stance from the EU. Widespread was the thinking that the UK’s laws and regulations were directly influenced by the EU, in which case exiting from the latter would cause catastrophic political-economic ripples in the UK. However, as per Hobolt et al. (2022), the power-oriented pro-Europeans realized a large decline in their expectations as the nation stood its ground past that bill. Its resilience outside the EU also shows the country’s power rests in the hands, considering that Brexit was initiated within the nation by a citizen of its own. This offers drastic empowering of the pro-sovereign individuals as far as the government is concerned.
There is leveling up phrase as constantly used in the nation’s records regarding operations of Brexit’s aftermath as controversial. Hudson (2022) frame an internal couple of extrapolations regarding the expectations of leaving the Union. For instance, activists show that the operation would create room for making new laws that govern how trading activities within the nation are conducted. According to Hudson (2022), the Brexit move would create 6500 jobs and pave the way for more bilateral trade agreements. These reports and statements are only linked to UK’s association with the Indian government. This deal seems to issue corrections on the former EU bond, in which case closing deals with this giant Asian country would be hard. However, in this case, the political shift shows an expected 533 euros and more than 6000 jobs as far as Brexit is concerned (Hudson, 2022). Further reveals the interest associated with this stance in that the UK will have more freedom in deciding where to stimulate trade and create hotspots for business operations. They can make policies within their empire and regulate them accordingly. This will have without much consultation with the larger European Union. In a nutshell, it will be “freedom at last “for the United Kingdom.
Economic Impacts of Brexit
Economists argue that exiting the EU would send the UK miles behind every nation. Davies (2022) affirms this by stating that the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) fell by 0.4 % a few months upon exit. Davies’s research (2022) also reveals that the government had grown by 14% in terms of its GDP between 2016 and 2021 on a quarterly scale. This is due to strong relations with its neighbors and is a center party in making almost all market and economy-related decisions in the continent. Being part of the EU also released the country of the need to comply with some regulations to be a part of the free trade area. In all these scenarios, it is positive to argue that being outside the EU requires many changes to be affected within and without the nation. This involves logistics, operations, and other activities preparing the country for survival outside the block. Therefore, now that they have settled these operations, everyone needs to hold on to their opinion regarding the UK. Maybe its GDP will stabilize and upsurge in the future.
The Brexit option negatively impacted the UK economically and indirectly. The EU-UK free trade agreement resulted in a decline in the exports and imports to the Union by 45% and 32.5%, respectively (Flach, 2022). It is intelligent to argue that the UK was receiving more revenue from its association with the European Union. This came in the form of tariffs and foreign exchange. It is also brainy to affirm that these achievements come due to the fewer regulations and soft measures around the continent that ensure smooth trade operations. Therefore, the rapid change in these bureaucratic measures and levies resulted in turbulence regarding trade flows. There was a need to adopt a fresh scheme of bringing goods into the region and sending them to distant areas. Although most of this decline can be associated with dealing with Covid-19 issues, data still shows a separate collection of reasons linking the EU-UK’s economic levels to the negative.
Researchers argue on this topic from the economic point of view as regards the UK’s state past its exit from the single market. Flach’s (2022) research shows that months after the exit, the rest of Europe, formally known as the eurozone, has grown immensely by 4%. On the contrary, the UK has remained in its initial position past the pandemic. Reports also show that the nation tried to maintain its posture as regards its take on European trade, but as of 2021, it fell back to its roots. The main reason for all these, as reported by Flach (2022), is the array of non-tariff barriers that came along after the nation’s transition period ended in early 2021. It is shocking to discover that the IFO had made these predictions that Brexit would cause a fall in the GDP for the UK and the Brussels-based institution.
The UK was not anticipating some of the impacts of Brexit. The nation expected a normal tariff level even after its exit. To their surprise, every product that needs to enter the market faces at least one new “non-tariff barrier.” Even worse, these regulations have been sent head-on to a nation still struggling with some of the highest covid-19 numbers globally. They must choose between supporting their deal to exit from the EU and sustaining their population amidst this pandemic. Flach (2022) describes these tariffs in several statements, such as inspection certificates. The traders within the nation were trustworthy as they led their goods around the European free trade area, but now, they need certificates whenever they want to sell merchandise.
Moreover, they need to meet new customer requirements in their operations. Every country within the EU will impose customized regulations and standards on them. They will have to comply for trading to occur. Another issue is the piling paperwork needed at every center where there are regulations. This constant inspection leads the nation-based traders into hard times as they suffer from inconveniences. Their operations are crippled, time is wasted, and a lot of resources are used in settling minor disagreements in their trade path. According to Flach (2022), the Brexit option would land the United Kingdom into much trouble trying to figure its way around the new life. It will need to seek support from distant friends considering that a large number of it neighbors and allies are still under the influence of the European Union.
Research shows the nation would face unprecedented economic impacts once they vote to leave the Union. According to this study, pro-EU campaigners argue that voting for Brexit means losing 3 million jobs throughout Europe (“Brexit: The pros and cons of leaving the EU”, 2022). This scenario needs a diverse vie to obtain the gist of the circumstance. Brexit would mean few people are flowing into the UK. This means less competition for employment in the country, which raises wages and salaries for the nationalists. It could seem like a big win for the nation, but as some argue in this research, it would not be a recommendable matter, especially for families outside the government but fully dependent on it. The country is endowed with resources and possibilities for success and tapping into this pool is a great win for most non-UK European nationalists.
From another perspective, Brexit means a shortage in skills and workforce in the UK. It is noteworthy that not every nation fully depends on itself as regards skillset and that some counties are more endowed than others. In line with this statement, the nation’s new immigration policies would lock some insanely skilled fellows from its presence, crippling some contracts and activities within the country.
The move would severely hit the nation’s agricultural business aspects. That is in line with a 2018 report from the Migration Advisory Committee that most of the seasonal workers in British Agriculture originated from EU countries (Dhingra & Sampson, 2022). On the bright side, the UK is reported to have landed deals such as the estimated multibillion-euro deal, which it sealed with Australia upon Brexit. This deal is also expected to open new frontiers in Japan, Norway, and Liechtenstein. Research by Dhingra & Sampson (2022) shows the possibility of the shrinking of the Sterling pound due to the exit vote. The level of the depreciation associated with this decline is at 20 percent, which is huge considering the dark economic sides caused by the recent pandemic. The report also predicts a double-digit decrease in the nation’s investments that had been laid to work in 2017 and 2018 (Dhingra & Sampson, 2022). The country is associated with immense services, especially in regions like London and the Southeast. After Brexit, these hotspots are expected to face a decline since the immigrant populations running operations therein will have long gone home.
References
Brexit: The pros and cons of leaving the EU. The week. (2022).
Davies, N. (2022). Brexit, two years on – so far, so bad. Investment Monitor.
Dhingra, S., & Sampson, T. (2022). Expecting Brexit (PDF) (pp. 1-40). Center for Economic Performance.
Flach, L. (2022). Brexit’s effects on UK trade are dramatic – but we feel them in the EU too. The Guardian.
Hobolt, S., Popa, S., Van der Brug, W., & Schmitt, H. (2021). The Brexit deterrent? How member state exit shapes public support for the European Union. European Union Politics, 23(1), 100-119.
Hudson, R. (2022). ‘Levelling up’ in post-Brexit United Kingdom: Economic realism or political opportunism? Local Economy: The Journal of the Local Economy Policy Unit, 37(1-2), 50-65.