[ad_1]
There are two possible options. The first is a short delay, designed to give the UK government a little more time to get its withdrawal agreement through Parliament, softened by some changes to the accompanying political statement. Or, the EU could propose in May a much longer extension, which can last for years, to give the United Kingdom more respite in which to unravel its Brexit disorder.
Less likely – but not impossible – is that the EU refuses any delay. European diplomatic sources have made it clear in recent months that any extension would be much easier to swallow if the UK clearly articulates its long-term intentions, rather than delaying things for no reason. To put it mildly, clarity has not been the strong point of Britain to this point.
Any delay in Brexit requires the unanimous approval of the European Council, the supreme decision-making body of the European Union bringing together the leaders of each Member State, meeting this week in Brussels. It is here that the difficulties begin. Since the beginning of the whole process, the Brexiteers have boldly baderted that the unity of the EU27 would eventually break and that the UK could finally get out of it.
That's not it. To date, the EU has firmly maintained the agreement reached with the UK – the so-called "withdrawal agreement" – insisting that it was locked and ready to be approved by Britain.
But given the unwillingness of the British Parliament to do so and the prospect of a delay on Brexit, something interesting has happened. For the first time in the Brexit process, we are approaching a summit of the European Council where the behavior of the EU can not be easily predicted.
The difficulty for the EU is that, whether long or short, any delay causes complications. And this is where opinions diverge in European capitals.
If the United Kingdom has not left the EU before May 22, it may have to participate in the elections to the European Parliament, which start the next day. Failure to do so could constitute a breach of the obligations of the United Kingdom as a Member State.
A short delay is therefore the preferred option for many people in Brussels, including Parliament. But that brings its own set of problems. First, there is no guarantee that in the end, the United Kingdom Parliament would have approved the May agreement. In reality, this could mean a delay to a Brexit without agreement that almost everyone claims to want to avoid, but that remains the default legal position.
The EU prefers Britain to ratify the withdrawal agreement. This is where the prospect of a long delay plays into the thinking of some.
A long delay is potentially a choice for the UK. If it wants to participate in the European elections, it must then legislate to do so before April 11. In this case, the EU could propose a delay of about two years, with a fixed deadline, but with a net result. out clause. If the House of Commons approved the May agreement on the Brexit in May, the UK would pull out of the EU and the extension of Article 50 would be reincarnated in the form of 39, a transition of two years, in accordance with the withdrawal agreement in force.
If all this seems a little tricky, here it is in plain language. British lawmakers would be offered the choice to vote to leave the EU with an agreement that they might not like to like, or remain as a full member state, which leads to a conjecture: a general election, another referendum, it's up to you to choose undesirable results.
Although his statement has been interpreted differently by virtually everyone, it seems obvious that if the EU gives something substantial – such as a new Brexit timetable – that would be enough to justify a third vote in Parliament.
This puts the ball to some extent in the court of the European Union, even if no one has a real idea of what he is likely to do with it.
Any delay in Brexit would of course be a political humiliation for the UK. But that would have the effect of keeping May's agreement pending for the moment and allowing him to bang his rebel deputies with the threat of an extended stay in the European Union if they did not bend.
If all this sounds confusing and opaque, it's because that's it. And if it seems irresponsible and risky, remember that in the current state of things, Brexit occurs in 10 days.
Finally, do not forget that it is only the act of one. If the withdrawal agreement is finally approved or if Britain withdraws from the EU without any agreement being reached, what will follow announces even more insoluble and more Hardly fought that all we have seen so far. As a well-placed EU source on the Brexit negotiations has stated to this day: "It was supposed to be the easiest part."
Source link
