[ad_1]
BRUSSELS – In the midst of the chaos that followed the British Parliament's historic rejection of an orderly withdrawal plan from the European Union, British lawmakers are increasingly under the impression that they will have to ask for an extension of the deadline. imminent departure – and that the leaders will give them what they want.
The idea is splashed by the headlines of the British tabloids. The London comment takes it for granted. Rigorous supporters of the European Union divorce say it would be a catastrophic mistake – but even they seem to expect that to happen.
The only problem? The remaining 27 USUs According to the diplomats involved in the discussions, countries are not sure of wanting to give Britain a break, and any stay requires unanimous approval.
The misalignment of viewpoints means that the risk of a Brexit without accidental and chaotic agreement on March 29 increases, according to diplomats and badysts in Brussels. (Most London badysts who believe a solution can be found do not think there is a problem.)
The British hypothesis that Brexit could easily be postponed would prolong the flow of false badumptions, misperceptions and erroneous calculations that torment London decision-makers since the June 2016 vote in favor of the exit of the EU. 39, European Union. But a departure without agreement that British decision makers do not wish would be the ultimate exclamation point to end the process. If Britain left without a transition plan in place, trade would be suspended. Foods and medications could become rare commodities.
"I do not see how the current agreement could be changed," Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte told reporters on Friday, warning Dutch companies to begin the "urgent" preparations for a chaotic departure for the British. .
On Wednesday, Rutte said that Brussels would consider "with charity" a request for the extension of the Brexit of London, echoing the remarks of French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
But there were constraints, many of which seemed to have sunk in the Channel towards Great Britain.
"We need to get an idea of how they want to solve the problems because there is no point in continuing to go around in circles for a few more months," said Rutte.
This point of view is widely shared in Brussels: a willingness to satisfy a British request for more time, but only on the condition that Downing Street gives credible badurances that it will not take this time to claim concessions that have already failed on the continent.
Many policymakers working on Brexit in Brussels said that Britain had given them little reason to expect a real plan.
"Computational errors are a permanent fact," said a senior European diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity in order to offer a candid badessment of the British position. "There will be no extension with an unknown goal."
EU. Policy makers say they can provide different scenarios that would justify an extension. One could be so May reconsider its refusal to join the EU The Customs Union, for example, would prevent Britain from concluding many trade deals but would simplify efforts to preserve peace in Northern Ireland by maintaining the open border with Ireland. This has been a major blocking point in the negotiations.
British leaders could also pledge to hold another referendum on Brexit, opening the door to a complete reversal. They could also try to convince Europe that they were about to find a compromise in their own ranks and that they just needed a little more time, said the decision-makers and badysts.
Yet, to read the British press, Brussels is sitting and waiting to be invited.
"EU, ready to postpone the withdrawal to next year," wrote a title this week in the Times of London.
"These sources are poorly informed or make themselves interesting or engage in speculation," said the European diplomat.
"Remove" not agree "from the table now, please, Prime Minister," Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn said in a speech on Thursday. In recent weeks, he has asked for an extension of the Brexit deadline to allow time for a new election, unaware that Britain can not change the deadline unilaterally.
May also has an interest in meeting the March deadline as a way to force her own conservative side to cooperate with her – and perhaps to accept the withdrawal agreement they recently torpedoed. She said, precisely, that she did not have the power to delay Brexit.
Last month, the highest US court ruled that Britain could unilaterally rescind Article 50, which initiated the withdrawal process, and cancel its decision to leave. But this decision does not apply only to the extension of Article 50 and postponement of departure, which would require the agreement of 27 other leaders.
If there was to be an extension, it would be relatively easy to give one until the end of June, said the decision makers. Subsequently, giving Britain extra time becomes thorny, with Europe holding elections in May for a new European Parliament to meet in July.
"What we will not let happen, that we move from one agreement to another, is that the waste of British politics is again imported into European politics," tweeted Guy Verhofstadt, Brexit Coordinator for the European Parliament. "Although we understand that the UK may need more time, it is unthinkable for us that Article 50 be extended beyond the European elections."
Leaving a country to remain in the European Union without parliamentary representation is legally debatable, as the European Treaties require and some European leaders fear that citizens of the United Kingdom or other countries will launch a challenge if they allow it.
Authorizing a temporary representation of Britain in the European Parliament is also politically unacceptable, as many members of the current British delegation are Eurosceptics who have pleaded for Brexit.
According to badysts, there could also be a cultural division in the shock of expectations. The UK legal system tends to give policymakers flexibility as fewer codes are listed in black and white legal codes. This is not the case in continental Europe, where legal systems are generally based on an uncompromising Napoleonic code.
"In a system without a constitution, everything is possible until the end," said Fabian Zuleeg, head of the European Policy Center, a Brussels think-tank.
This creates a risk of miscalculation. And since there does not appear to be a majority in the UK Parliament for a given Brexit plan, the default route – a chaotic crash in March – may be the most likely route, he said.
"No agreement is the default," he said. "It's the only option on the table where you do not need the majority."
Quentin Ariès in Brussels contributed to this report.
Read more:
How a Brexit without agreement could create chaos in Europe
bad Brexiteers want to leave the European Union without agreement
A second referendum on Brexit was once a pipe dream. Some are now wondering if this is the only way out of the chaos.
Today's coverage of Swiss Post correspondents around the world
Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay informed about foreign news
[ad_2]
Source link
