British voters have delivered the most unexpected election result in decades. Everyone expected Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party to be either significantly damaged or totally crushed. Yet, it was Theresa May that ended up humiliated and her political career largely finished.
What does the new parliamentary arithmetic mean for Brexit and for Britain’s future relationship with the EU?
The truth is that nobody knows. But one thing is certain: the current situation provides an opportunity both for Britain and for the EU that was unimaginable only a few days ago. The EU should set about making sure the opportunity is not squandered.
Until just days ago, the predominant question was: what is Britain really trying to achieve from the Brexit negotiations? Now, that question should be turned on its head. The primary question should be: what would the EU wish to achieve from the negotiations? As we have seen, nothing is either predictable or impossible.
The EU should, therefore, achieve some clarity and consensus as to what the desired outcome would be: a UK that leaves the EU, the single market and the Customs union; a UK outside the EU but within the Customs union and, maybe, also the single market; or a UK that remains a full member of the EU?
Given the current UK situation, none of these options should be excluded.
The UK will have a highly unstable government until the next election – which could come within weeks, months or years. May could well be replaced as Prime Minister within the next six to 12 months. The government can only survive with the support (though not a formal coalition) of the Democratic Unionist Party – a small party (10 parliamentary seats) from Northern Ireland that does not have easy collaboration within its DNA.
The DUP supports Brexit but would likely wish to remain within the Customs union to avoid a hard border with the Republic of Ireland. Fiercely loyalist to a United Kingdom, the DUP is also against any arrangement that creates any kind of different status for Northern Ireland compared to the rest of the UK.
The Conservative Party itself is a coalition of multiple interests ranging from a strongly pro-EU faction to an obsessively anti-EU group. The Scottish branch of the party (12 seats) is strongly pro-EU.
The same can be said of Labour except that fiercely anti-EU Labour members are rare.
The Scottish Nationalists (35 seats) and the Liberal Democrats (12 seats) are passionately pro-EU.
All this in a Parliament that has no history of effective cross-party collaboration. With such messy fragmentation, it is largely impossible to predict what kind of EU deal will be able to command a parliamentary majority.
Ultimately, it is not only Parliament that matters but also public sentiment, however difficult that is to read.
So, what should the EU do?
As I said, the first task is to reach consensus on what the EU’s desired outcome would be. Assuming member states would rather Britain remained either a full member or within the single market/Customs union, then the EU should mount a full lobbying effort to steer the UK in that direction.
What matters now is not the tedious technicalities and timing of any negotiation but creating and nurturing a UK political environment that becomes supportive of the desired outcome.
May’s likely short tenure as Prime Minister has been nothing short of a disaster. It has been unreasonable and belligerent. It has not done anything to endear itself to its EU partners. It would be quite understandable if irritation and exasperation were the dominant emotions towards Great Britain. Such emotions, reasonable though they might be, should now be resisted and the focus should be on the desired outcome. Michel Barnier and Donald Tusk have already started to make the right noises. Others have not.
A careful choice should be made of the individuals who will make public statements about UK-EU relations. Aggressive or highly federalist individuals should be silenced irrespective of their official positions. Reasonable people who are highly regarded in the UK should lead the charm offensive. Tusk and Barnier are two such individuals. There are others.
Member states that either have a particularly close relationship with the UK or which themselves have an uneasy relationship with the EU should also seek to influence. Ireland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Poland, Italy, Germany, Malta and Portugal immediately come to mind.
Issues that are pointlessly inflammatory (like the status of Gibraltar) should take a back seat in the public discourse.
Finally, after the German (and, possibly, Italian) elections in autumn, the long-awaited discussion on the future shape of the EU may well start. If those discussions veer towards a more flexible, pragmatic and decentralised EU rather than a centralised, supranational dirigisme, that would further serve to strengthen British support for a reformed EU.
A Britain that is closely linked or within the EU is beneficial both for the UK and for Europe. Among the many lessons from the election is the clear fact that, apart from a few political obsessives on either side, the EU is not top of mind among the British public.
People care more about things closer to home – public services, healthcare, security, education and so forth. Herein lies the opportunity. But if it is to take it, the EU must see the current chaos and instability within the UK as an opportunity for a new entente rather than a source of schadenfreude and short-term tactical advantage.
Think big. Anything may be possible.
Joe Zammit-Lucia is a co-founder and trustee of radix.org.uk, a London-based think tank and author of ‘The death of liberal democracy?’