Just three weeks after Brexit, there are already two clear forces taking shape: countries vying with each other to scavenge on the fall-out; and British attempts to put on a brave face and show the world that it really did have post-Brexit plans, irrespective of the ‘rats’ that abandoned ship.

The EU is under pressure to show that the waters outside the union are stormy and shark-infested, worried that other member states might cast themselves adrift. It could, of course, have chosen to do this by tackling the root causes of the unease that is pervading so many other voters in so many other countries. Instead, it is trying to present a united front, despite the fault lines that have been all too apparent for years.

Individual member states are licking their lips in anticipation of the exodus from Britain ­ – or rather, from England and Wales, it would seem – of investment and brains. Paris has already outlined its fiscal incentives to lure financial service providers and Frankfurt is wining and dining all those banks and funds operating in euros that might be nudged into having their headquarters within the eurozone.

Malta is not holding back either. Prime Minister Joseph Muscat told Parliament recently that Malta was already having talks on attracting some UK-based business and was tackling problems which could hinder such business relocation, including issues such as the availability of independent schooling. Lucky for us that the shortage of offices might be so overwhelmingly sorted by a high-rise or 10!

In the meantime, the UK is doing some grandstanding of its own. It had trade talks last week in India, likely to be followed in the coming months by discussions with the United States, China, Japan and South Korea.

Clearly, what is left of the Leave campaign now has to show that the UK would be more nimble outside the EU – which has been unable to forge a deal with India, for example.

The subliminal message from the EU has been somewhat confusing on this. It has been trying to warn the UK that trade deals are not that easy and sniffing at the Leave campaign’s insistence that it would come running to the table given the substantial level of trade flows.

At the same time, perhaps under pressure to show that the Trans Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and the US is not going to lead to an apocalypse, it announced last week that it had signed a suspiciously similar agreement with Canada, which raised some concerns from civil society – but nothing on the scale of those against TTIP. Clearly, the antagonism about trade deals is as much about the perception of the trading partner’s ability to bulldoze their way through as it is about the actual mechanisms.

Before the referendum, the scenarios were drawn in superficial, bold strokes, without any contamination by the laws of equal and opposition reaction, without any distinction between short-term chaos and what would emerge once the dust settled.

It is tempting to dissect what went wrong with the Remain campaign and to grouse about what has been wrong with the EU. The reality is that life plods along, finding other roads and making the best of the bad situation (albeit after considerable pain). Ironic really, as this is, after all, the British way.