trajectory, pitching newfound wisdom against the status quo. 5 The decision by the United Kingdom (UK) to withdraw from the European Union (EU) (‘Brexit’) and Donald Trump’s presidency have shattered this trade orthodoxy in ways still to be uncovered. 6 This article confines its observations to the effects
(Withdrawal) Bill in the uk Parliament, on 11 September 2017, giving effect to provisions in the uk Governments Brexit White Paper , discussed below. For details of the ongoing progress of the Bill, see the uk Parliament Website at https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/europeanunionwithdrawal
legal relationship with the eu upon exit. The legal issues related to withdrawal are also magnified in complexity in the context of Brexit because the eu does not neatly fit within the category of a traditional international organization.
Discussing the uk ’s withdrawal from the eu
responsibility for organising an “orderly” Brexit fully respecting the result of the referendum. In February of 2017, May’s government presented legislation and a white paper
to kick off this process. Having received the approval of the British Parliament, the government invoked article 50 of the Treaty
Brexit – the name given to the uk ’s decision to leave the European Union ( eu ) after the national referendum in June 2016, is a complex, controversial, and highly contentious diplomatic game. The uk ’s referendum decision, and the domestic and international politics that followed have much to
Since Donald Trump’s inauguration as president in January 2017, U.S. foreign relations have been volatile and unpredictable.
Surprisingly, this has included relations with Britain, traditionally Washington’s closest ally. For Britain and its self-inflicted Brexit dilemma this is highly
“take back control of [UK] waters”. 5 Figure 1 United Kingdom maritime limits in the North Sea The present article discusses the question of post-Brexit exclusive economic zone ( EEZ ) fisheries access between the UK and the EU from the perspective of public international law and EU law. The term
, the nationals of the member states were placed into a direct legal relationship with the Union, from which they derive certain rights. This makes the situation far more complex than the usual paradigm of state membership in an international organization. It means that the narrative of Brexit cannot
Brexit is a huge challenge with enormous consequences for future UK trade policy. But it will also have an impact on the common external trade policy of the EU, and, thus, on one of the core components of EU foreign policy. This contribution analyses Britain’s role in the formulation of EU trade policy and the likely repercussions of its departure, particularly regarding the effectiveness of the EU as trade negotiator and the preferences it represents internationally. I use three theoretical lenses to address these questions: the first lens focuses on likely changes in the material power and interests of the EU; the second looks at the institutional consequences of Brexit for the formulation of EU foreign trade policy, and the third addresses potential changes in external perceptions of the EU as a trade power. It will be argued that neither the effectiveness of the EU as global trade power, nor the substance of its interests, will change substantially
Triggering Brexit On June 23, 2016, the UK held a referendum as to whether it should ‘Remain’ or ‘Leave’ the European Union. The result was a 52 to 48 percent majority to leave – the so-called Brexit. Although not formally binding, the political imperative for the UK to unravel over 40 years of