Question for non-british Europeans

[Hazir]

As you may know or not know the citizens of the UK will vote on the 23rd of june on the continuation of the membership of the EU. This choice of course is entirely their's to make but once they have made it all EU members will have to deal with the outcome.

I was wondering what the reaction of the EU should be according to people here if the UK votes to leave the EU. After having asked this I would ask members who are going to vote in the upcoming referendum to refrain from reacting here, as this is not their discussion.

So what do you think?

Should the EU cooperate with the UK to give it full access to the common market without the UK having to apply the rules concerning the 4 freedoms, more particular the one about the freedom of movement of workers/persons?

Should the EU cooperate with the UK in a way to make a deal possible that puts the UK on a par with countries like Switzerland and/or Norway? This would mean the UK would not get the freedom to revoke any legislation that is required for the function of the common market and in the future would be obliged to apply new legislation from Brussels.

Should the EU retaliate against the UK by treating the UK as a 'third country', which has no blanket access to the common market?

Should the EU react in any different way? If yes please explain.

My emotional reaction would be to choose option 3, but I still choose option 2 as I do not want to see a situation in Europe which could deteriorate rapidly into the old chaos on the continent.

[Flixy]

I haven't really thought much about it, but I don't really see a reason not to make similar deals as with Norway and Switzerland.

[Hazir]

I haven't really thought much about it, but I don't really see a reason not to make similar deals as with Norway and Switzerland.

I could think of some reasons to do that, for example the economical damage we might sustain due to their departure. But even with such damage being likely I wouldn't want to chose for an option that might lead to a serious and prolonged recession in the UK.

I'm wondering who chose the 'sweet deal' option; I know I put it in the poll, but it's a bit like letting someone have all the membership advantages and none of the burdens. It's not a realistic option. It's more the pipe dream of Brexit supporters.

[Loki]

If Britain leaves the EU because it doesn't want to follow EU regulations, it would be nearly impossible for the next British government to agree to any EU deal that requires Britain to follow EU regulations.

[Hazir]

If Britain leaves the EU because it doesn't want to follow EU regulations, it would be nearly impossible for the next British government to agree to any EU deal that requires Britain to follow EU regulations.

I agree it would be a hard sell at home, but the alternative is much worse in real terms. So far the EU has never shown any inclination to give a country free access for free. Given the difference in size and the difference in the importance in trade on either side there's no way the EU is going to pretend the UK is an equal partner.

And let's not forget for any deal at all you'd need the consent of countries like Poland etc, not just Germany and The Netherlands who would also benefit from a deal without further conditions.

[Loki]

I agree it would be a hard sell at home, but the alternative is much worse in real terms. So far the EU has never shown any inclination to give a country free access for free.

The political cost would be suicide. And we can assume that a post-Brexit government would be a nationalist one. Economics won't enter the equation (or they'll just lie, like the Brexit camp right now).

[Hazir]

The political cost would be suicide. And we can assume that a post-Brexit government would be a nationalist one. Economics won't enter the equation (or they'll just lie, like the Brexit camp right now).

Maybe, but why should the political suicide of the post-Brexit British government be of concern to us?

[Loki]

To some extent. My point isn't that the EU should give in; rather that it's unrealistic to expect a post-Brexit Britain to compromise. Realistically, there will be a lot of stalled negotiations that will accomplish little until the nationalist government gets forced out of office by Labour, the economy collapses entirely, or the EU stops being a salient issue. That's 4-10 years at a minimum.

[Hazir]

To some extent. My point isn't that the EU should give in; rather that it's unrealistic to expect a post-Brexit Britain to compromise. Realistically, there will be a lot of stalled negotiations that will accomplish little until the nationalist government gets forced out of office by Labour, the economy collapses entirely, or the EU stops being a salient issue. That's 4-10 years at a minimum.

I see, but that's really a problem for the Brits to solve. I'm talking about our side's position.

And given that what the Brits want is worth a lot in cold hard euros I think we should under no circumstances agree to a deal where we don't get at least our money back. For example on the matter of Euro clearing houses; i'd definetely push through the requirement of those being under the jurisdiction of the ECB. Either as in physically located in a EU country or legally brought under the ECB jurisdiction. A British controled euro clearing house would be utterly unacceptable to me.

[Loki]

The EU would have to take avoid the perception that it's unwilling to compromise, because that would create friction not just with Britain, but also with other eurosceptic countries. But it can't give in to every British demand or exit will look like a good option for those same eurosceptics. Which means offering a Swiss/Norwegian model and being willing to budge on some issues (which will be insufficient to any post-Brexit British government for the foreseeable future). That seems like the approach the EU takes with the British anyway.

[Hazir]

The EU would have to take avoid the perception that it's unwilling to compromise, because that would create friction not just with Britain, but also with other eurosceptic countries. But it can't give in to every British demand or exit will look like a good option for those same eurosceptics. Which means offering a Swiss/Norwegian model and being willing to budge on some issues (which will be insufficient to any post-Brexit British government for the foreseeable future). That seems like the approach the EU takes with the British anyway.

A Swiss/Norwegian deal gives some room for negotiating, I agree. But there are certain issues where I would want the EU to not consider British interests at all, for the simple reason that they concern our core interests. (Like the clearing houses). I'd also absolutely would want to see a guillotine clause added to whatever deal is struck with the Brits. They have had their cute little game with picking and chosing as members, but once they no longer are members they either stick to the deals the make or there is no deal at all.

[Loki]

I don't really see how the British can object about the clearing house if they're no longer part of the common market.

[Aimless]

While many less-serious Brexiters seem to support a Swiss or Norwegian solution, I believe a post-Brexit govt. would have neither the inclination nor the mandate to accede to any new deal that continues to provide for the free movement of people under the same terms as for Norway and Switzerland, and I don't believe the EU should compromise with the UK on that matter or give the UK any other form of special treatment.

I don't believe any further punishment will be necessary or decent. Brexit is likely to bring many short-to-medium term problems for the UK even under the most optimistic scenarios, at least during the years of negotiations between the UK and the EU, EFTA, WTO and various individual countries.

The EU, too, will suffer from a Brexit and I don't believe it would benefit greatly from spending time and effort on punishing the UK more than consequences of Brexit will entail anyway. Best way to win a break-up is to get over it faster and better than your ex

[Hazir]

While many less-serious Brexiters seem to support a Swiss or Norwegian solution, I believe a post-Brexit govt. would have neither the inclination nor the mandate to accede to any new deal that continues to provide for the free movement of people under the same terms as for Norway and Switzerland, and I don't believe the EU should compromise with the UK on that matter or give the UK any other form of special treatment.

I don't believe any further punishment will be necessary or decent. Brexit is likely to bring many short-to-medium term problems for the UK even under the most optimistic scenarios, at least during the years of negotiations between the UK and the EU, EFTA, WTO and various individual countries.

The EU, too, will suffer from a Brexit and I don't believe it would benefit greatly from spending time and effort on punishing the UK more than consequences of Brexit will entail anyway. Best way to win a break-up is to get over it faster and better than your ex

That sounds pretty much like option 3. But it looks like you didn't vote that way.

[Aimless]

That sounds pretty much like option 3. But it looks like you didn't vote that way.

I haven't voted yet, but to me that's basically option 2, ie. at best a deal similar to the one with Switzerland, or, more realistically, one similar to the one with Norway. I believe that's what I'd vote for because the transition and the realities of a post-Brexit UK economy would, in my view, be punishment enough for all parties.

[Hazir]

I wonder how the Norwegian contributions translate to a country with an economy the size of the UK. I remember seeing figures that Norway was amongst the highest paying net contributors on a per capita basis.

[Hazir]

I am starting to get the feeling the other EU members are starting to lean towards punishing the UK or at least not giving it any easy deal. Both Rajoy (Spain) and Rutte (Netherlands) are hinting at a hard reset wrt residency rights of British citizens.

[Hazir]

What I would definately want to see is that the 27 members convene as soon as possible after a vote to exit the EU and set a firm cut off date for all rights depending on EU membership at 2 years after that meeting. With such a decision you'd give both the EU and the UK a reasonable term to adjust, time to negotiate if wanted, without creating a phantom membership. The decisions in my eyes would include re-assessing the rights of British citizens to live, work and/or have a business in the EU. I could imagine that British residents in the EU would have to provide proof of sufficient income and sufficient coverage against healthcare costs.

[Hazir]

Here is an interesting article describing how the British parliament might act to steer a Brexited UK into the EEA. Though I wonder if we have to take such a tactic too serious as the British parliament obviously isn' t the party we' re dealing with in a case of a Brexit.

[earthJoker]

Well as a Swiss I obviously would give the UK the same deal as to us

But the same deal doesn't mean the current deal. Remember, Switzerland is trying to get a better deal with the EU as well. It's the wet dream of many right wing Swiss to form a economical alliance with the UK against the EU once the UK is out of the union.

While this is theoretically a good idea as both countries want to have a more economical and less political union, I don't really see how such an alliance will ever come to life.

[Loki]

Cooperation between nationalists rarely works because of...nationalism.

[earthJoker]

That's exactly why I don't see a SVP UKIP cooperation. A Torries FDP cooperation for a better EEA would be interesting but I still think it is unlikely as I don't think the Torries would see tiny Switzerland as a serious partner.

[RandBlade]

If we vote leave then UKIP are history. They only have one MP and even he is a glorified independent who hates Farage. Farage has been unable to win a seat even while in the EU, out of it he has no chance.

The Tories do and would take Switzerland seriously. Gove and Johnson and others have spoken very highly of Switzerland. In the event we vote leave, whichever of Gove or Johnson becomes new PM (I'd vote Gove) will be making new alliances a top priority and the Swiss and Norwegians will be up at the top of the list.

[earthJoker]

Switzerland and the UK pretty much want to move in the same direction. Having control over immigration. That doesn't mean no immigration, just to make it clear that this is not the same.

As for Norway, I actually don't know.

[RandBlade]

With the far right close to either taking power or rising in power in the France, Hungary, Poland, the Netherland, Greece and even Germany ... it's quite possible our nations will be more pro-migration than many EU ones.

[Hazir]

Switzerland and the UK pretty much want to move in the same direction. Having control over immigration. That doesn't mean no immigration, just to make it clear that this is not the same.

As for Norway, I actually don't know.

Unless the Swiss are willing to accept a new incarnation of the voted down European Economical Area there is little chance of the EU coming to a tripartite deal with both Switzerland and the UK. To be honest I doubt the EU is willing to do any multi-party deal that doesn't set identical rules for all present EFTA members, Switzerland and possibly the UK.

And from what is being said louder and louder in capitals around the EU it is highly unlikely that such a deal would look anything like getting access without submitting to the rules set by the EU and paying like a member.

Having said that; it may lead to a situation where there is no deal possible with the UK and a break-down in the relations with Switzerland.

[Loki]

Interesting numbers, especially for the UK and Greece.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/07/...-europe-or-not

[RandBlade]

I'm more shocked that 31% of FN want powers transfered to the EU.

[earthJoker]

Unless the Swiss are willing to accept a new incarnation of the voted down European Economical Area there is little chance of the EU coming to a tripartite deal with both Switzerland and the UK.

Not going to happen unless the EEA is changed.

To be honest I doubt the EU is willing to do any multi-party deal that doesn't set identical rules for all present EFTA members, Switzerland and possibly the UK.

Neither would Switzerland. I highly doubt that the Swiss people would agree on any deal, that would give the UK more rights than Switzerland.

And from what is being said louder and louder in capitals around the EU it is highly unlikely that such a deal would look anything like getting access without submitting to the rules set by the EU and paying like a member.

It's usual to say things louder before giving in.

Having said that; it may lead to a situation where there is no deal possible with the UK and a break-down in the relations with Switzerland.

Not in the interest of the EU. But the European leaders *cought*Merkel*cought* have done several things not in the interest of the EU lately so I wont rule that out any more.

[RandBlade]

Neither would Switzerland. I highly doubt that the Swiss people would agree on any deal, that would give the UK more rights than Switzerland.

That's what I'd expect. Nor would I expect the UK to agree a deal giving less rights than Switzerland. Which is why it would make sense for Tories and FDP to want to co-operate.

Not in the interest of the EU. But the European leaders *cought*Merkel*cought* have done several things not in the interest of the EU lately so I wont rule that out any more.

Merkel is fudgemaster general. Talk tough and refuse to give any ground until deadline day then fudge whatever is required to kick the can down the road and keep the show on the road. That makes her quite unpredictable as its essentially an international game of "chicken".