 |
| Brexit |
Invoking Article 50 has commenced the process by which the United Kingdom will achieve once again, that which the majority sought. The degree of involvement, proportion of trade and final details of removing themselves from the European Union will take years to finalize yet the act is now final. Drafted to make the EU ‘more democratic, more transparent and more efficient,’ the Lisbon Treaty of 2007, which came into effect in 2009, made it possible for member states to opt out when so desired. The vision with which the Union was carefully crafted, the process of integration and the effort exerted in bringing it to its current state, stand questionable today. While regionalism bears a direct impact on sovereignty, European states themselves chose, voluntarily, to deepen their partnership over the decades.
Sovereignty, its protection and preservation, remains at the core of national interest. Westphalia has been credited often with having spurred the identification of sovereignty and ensured the state became the political institution embodying it. Articles 73 and 76 of the Treaty which refer to ‘Lordship and Sovereignty’ and ‘Jurisdiction and Sovereignty’ respectively, detail the term in connection with governance and justice, and this it is presupposed is what forms the basis of equating the term to 1648. Yet it has been argued by J. R. Strayer that sovereignty as a practice, though not a term was in use centuries before in the 1300s between France and England. Daniel Philcott accepting this claim highlights that ‘two centuries of civil war delayed sovereignty’s lasting consolidation’ and argues that ‘Westphalia indeed made sovereign statehood a norm.’
Thus preservation of sovereignty is the raison d’être of states. Thomas J. Biersteker and Cynthia Weber observe that ‘throughout the course of history, the meaning of sovereignty has undergone important change and transformation – from the location of the source of legitimacy (in God, in the monarch or in the people) – to the scope of activities under its protection.’ While Stephen D. Krasner believes that sovereignty relates to ‘a system of political authority based on territory, mutual recognition, autonomy and control,’ Peter Hägel is of the view that ‘the concept of sovereignty designates a form of rule that is intrinsically entwined with the emergence and existence of the modern states system.’
The march of the Europeans towards consolidation into one region, dates back centuries as attempts had been at varying times and for differing periods to amalgamate the region. Carried out more by force than choice in the past, the mood post-Second World War favored the option of integration to avoid the ravages of war, which Europe had endured too frequently and for too long. States understood the implications of integration which would come at a cost to sovereignty, yet they chose the former for the greater good of the region. British leaders too comprehended the ramifications when attempting to enter and finally secured a berth for Britain in an integrated Europe.
The process, although taking several decades to realize a functional model of regionalism, was unique, from formation and implementation to deep integration across a variety of sectors. It reached another milestone as the Cold War ended, membership expanded and integration grew strong. Yet Daniel Philcott notes that ‘among the hallowed things that fell with the Berlin Wall was the sanctity of absolute sovereignty in international relations, the principle that within their borders, state institutions are untouchable, inviolable and supreme.’ Hinsley’s ‘absolute sovereignty’, which Philcott alludes to, and which was subsequently developed by Hobbes, Bodin and Rousseau, entails the ‘idea that there is a final and absolute political authority in the political community... and no final and absolute authority exists elsewhere.’
Thus sacrificing absolute control, power and supremacy was part of the price that states paid for integration and a price, it may be argued, that is worth paying given that which accrues to a single state through membership in a regional body, especially the EU. Philcott notes that ‘this (began) a generation earlier when European states pooled their sovereignty over trade, commerce, and other affairs into the institution of the European Community.’
The demand for preservation of sovereignty, which dominated the debate, raises several causes for concern. While England voted to leave with 53.2% opting out as opposed to 46.8 who preferred to stay in, Wales saw 51.7% deciding it was best to exit and 48.3% chose to remain. The irony of arguing on the basis of sovereignty as a pillar upon which the Brexit camp chose to campaign was severely questioned when considering the results of Scotland and Northern Ireland. Whilst a massive 62% of Scottish voters chose to remain as opposed to 38% opting to leave the EU, Northern Ireland saw 55.7% supporting the Bremain camp and 44.3% not.
The result could have been considered rational had it been spread evenly across the nation, yet the state realized the danger lurking in the result when Scottish First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon announced on the morning after that she would ‘take all possible steps and explore all possible options to give effect to how people in Scotland voted - in other words to secure our continuing place in the EU, and in the single market in particular.’ Given that this referendum came two years after a vote in Scotland which explored the possibility of independence, her view that ‘an independence referendum is now highly likely but I also think it is important that we take time to consider all steps and have the discussions, not least to assess the response of the European Union to the vote that Scotland expressed,’ was met in all seriousness when Prime Minister Theresa May opted to fly first to Scotland the day after she was sworn in, to reassure the Scottish First Minister and people of her ‘commitment to preserving this special union that has endured for centuries.’ The last few weeks have seen Sturgeon stoking the fires of independence once again, drawing attention to the subject.
Gerry Adams, the Sinn Fein President has noted that ‘the British government should respect the popular vote in the North for European Union membership by bringing forward a referendum on Irish unity. The Irish government, too, should act on this,’ indicated the fragility of Britain’s unity casting doubts over the effectiveness of the Brexit camp’s main slogan. Adams’ apprehension over the Good Friday Agreement and its buried divisions, the North-South border and its near-vanished nature, the economy and trade, and chiefly over democracy, creates concern in London. His acclamation that Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny supported his ‘proposal for an All-Ireland forum of political parties and civic partners to deal with the consequences of Brexit,’ would augur well for Irish unity and strengthen sovereignty therein yet erode that which was hitherto sought and enjoyed by Britain.
Peter J. Katzenstein’s view that ‘it is the convoluted interconnections of countries and regions that define the current global order’ would resonate in the corridors of Europe, as it makes a choice of ascending that order, precariously hanging on or be forced to commence descending, thereby sacrificing all that it has come to represent. President Hollande lamenting the vote last year, was quick to note that ‘it's a decision that was taken by the British people...it is the British who will have to bear the consequences,’ thus indicating where the onus lay.
For sovereignty and its campaigners, questions arise as to whether it has been preserved in the spirit in which it was intended, or has it faced its most trying moment and projected what is to come, with the statistics and sentiments emanating from Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Churchill’s warning that the best argument against democracy was a five minute conversation with the average voter, has been ignored by his own country and party, who chose instead to follow his paradoxically-opposed argument that democracy is the worst form of government, except all the others. Irrespective of whether democracy is the preferred choice or not, the British people have spoken and their leaders have pledged to carry forward their decision. Britain has been able to hold sway over global politics once more.
S.Saraswathi’s contention that ‘Brexit is an outcome of the inevitable conflict between the requirements of State sovereignty and the terms governing regional integration (and that) it is a democratic decision,’ denotes the nature of democracy itself.
