Brexit: Europe hurt, puzzled, relieved

At the end of last week I was in Freiburg; a prosperous, pretty university town in the southwestern corner of Germany. I took the opportunity to speak to my German friends, acquaintances and students about their reactions to the recent British vote to leave the European Union. Of course, the people I spoke to hardly comprise a scientifically chosen sample of the German population. But I think their views are probably representative, or at least representative of more educated Germans.

What did I hear Hurt that the British, generally looked on fondly by many Germans as wittier, eccentric and disorganised versions of themselves, should wish to desert them. Disappointment that the British, hitherto considered to be dependable and reliable, should have so comprehensively let down Europe in such perilous times: terrorist attacks by so-called Islamic State, Vladimir Putin’s depredations, the arrival of refugees from the Middle East and economic stagnation. Insult that the British should be so dismissive of the noble aims of the European project: dissolving age-old enmities in a peaceful, democratic and prosperous continental community.

Above all I heard incomprehension. There was incomprehension that the British — a people they had believed to be level-headed and pragmatic — had taken leave of their senses. Those I spoke to simply couldn’t understand how the British could have decided to inflict such grievous harm on themselves. They cannot understand why the British should wish to jeopardise their prosperity so recklessly. It seems obvious to them that departure from the EU will put at risk the United Kingdom’s continued access to the world’s largest economic bloc and all the economic benefits that flow from it. But more than economic harm, the people I spoke to cannot understand why the British should wish to isolate themselves politically and socially. Departure from the EU will not increase British influence. It can only diminish it. No friendly power has applauded the British decision. While they must respect it, it is clear they also regret it.

But if there’s incomprehension on the part of the Germans I spoke to, that incomprehension is virtually nothing compared to the incomprehension of those who led the campaign for the UK to quit the EU. Quite simply, the quitters don’t appear to be able to grasp reality. They have a romantic view that British greatness — free of the EU’s shackles — will reassert itself. A glorious future awaits the nation. A close friend of mine, a Belgian, neatly summed it up. The British are suffering from political psychosis. Its symptoms are delusions of grandeur.

There is abreast in quitter circles the idea that the UK can negotiate full access to the European single market for British goods, services and capital without having to concede access to the British labour market for EU nationals. The EU states have made it very clear that free movement of labour is absolutely non-negotiable. This has always been a fundamental principle of the EU. It underpinned the European project since its inception nearly 60 years ago. Or to put it more pragmatically, it is inconceivable that simply to suit the British the other EU member states would be prepared to abandon an obligation which they impose on themselves and require of each other.

The quitters counter that this is just posturing and say the EU has more to lose than the UK. They like to point to the fact that the UK imports more from EU than the EU imports from the UK. Quite apart from the perversity of pointing to a trade deficit as evidence of economic strength, the reality is that nearly 50 per cent of UK exports go to the EU while fewer than 10 per cent of EU exports go to the UK. Evidently the loss of easy access to the UK market would hurt the EU, but the loss of easy access to the EU market for the UK would be disastrous. Not only would exclusion from the EU single market ruin many exporters, it would also make the UK deeply unattractive for foreign direct investment. As the inward flow of foreign capital dried up the UK, with its yawning trade deficit, would cease to be able to pay its way in the world. If the quitters persist in their delusions, rather than a glorious future for the UK there will be the deep humiliation of an IMF loan.

The quitters’ incomprehension extends to the political as well. Having seen the UK’s EU membership in essentially transactional terms, they fail to understand that the other member states do not see the EU in the same way. For them the political aspects of the EU are central, even its raison d’etre. For the most part they genuinely aspire to greater European coherence and cooperation as a good in its own right. For years the British have, at best, sneered at this aspiration and, at worst, sought to thwart it. Time and time again the other member states have accommodated British demands for national exceptions and derogations. The last occasion was when they acceded to Mr Cameron’s demands for a special position for the UK: to be in the EU but not of it. That compromise was rejected by the British in the referendum. The patience of the Europeans is now exhausted. Their goodwill has evaporated.

And this brings me to the last of the feelings expressed to me: relief. At last Europe can pursue the ideals on which it was founded without the carping and obstructionism of the British. That expression of relief underlines more than anything else the quitters’ profound incomprehension. The quitters’ notion that Britain is a great nation, to be accorded deference, respect and special favours by its continental neighbours, flies in the face of history and common sense. The longer the quitters cling to their fond delusions the more likely it is that they will create a harsh reality: an impoverished Britain isolated from the European continent and ignored by the rest of the world.

The writer is a lawyer and a keen observer of European affairs, and works in the UK and France