Just the beginning

London's weak position is visible in the Brexit deal

The European Union and Great Britain have finally made a breakthrough in their divorce talks. Negotiations had been going on for over six months without much progress on a way forward for Brexit. But it was announced on Friday that concord had been achieved among Europe’s leaders and by British Prime Minister Theresa May on certain key aspects. Two of the more problematic questions pertained to the status of current residents of the UK who are EU citizens, and the exact amount that London owes Brussels as its share of outstanding obligations. The leaders have agreed on answers to these questions: London will pay Brussels 40 billion euros in the coming years, and EU citizens living in the UK will have their rights protected by the European Court of Justice. This is a far cry from the original offers from London; Ms May conceded absolutely everything she could in order to get things moving. This may have been wise, but it does not augur well for future negotiations from Britain’s perspective.

This agreement is the beginning and not the end of discussion. It sets some terms for Brexit; now comes the far more arduous task of determining exactly what relationship the UK and Europe will have after Brexit is completed. Will there be a simple free trade agreement? Will there be no such deal? Will there be a deeper agreement on trade, services and immigration, such as the EU has with Norway? All this is still unknown. What is worth noting, however, is how difficult the process has been so far – not because of divides between London and Brussels, or within the multi-nation European bloc, but because of the raucous domestic coalition Ms May has to manage. Her own position weakened by a disastrous election campaign in which she lost her majority, she has had to balance radical euro-sceptics within her Conservative Party with others who are more sympathetic to Europe and she has also had to play off free-trade fans against economic nationalists. These divides, which are also visible in the Opposition Labour Party, will make Britain’s own approach to negotiations over its future relationship with Europe schizophrenic. Any outcome is still possible.

In addition, Ms May was faced with a revolt by the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), which represents Protestants in Northern Ireland, and which Ms May relies on for a working majority in the House of Commons. The DUP objected to a clause in the draft agreement that suggested that Northern Ireland would have a different regulatory structure, closer to the EU’s, than the rest of the country. This was necessary in order to avoid border checks between Northern Ireland, part of the UK, and the Republic of Ireland to its south. An open border was a crucial ingredient in the peace agreements that ended the decades of violence in Northern Ireland. It is worth noting also that there is no real consensus among Belfast, Dublin, London and Brussels on how to solve this problem. No obvious solution presents itself. It is possible that, in a few years from now, Britain will be presented with an option: A choice between Brexit and the destruction of a hard-won peace in Ireland. Again, any outcome is possible.