After the referendum held on the 23th of June 2016, the United Kingdom decided to invoke article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon, and became the first country to leave the European Union. Two years from this date, the EU and UK have not yet ratified the withdrawal agreement. However, conceding that the deal should be finalized by the end of January 2020, it is likely to have not only domestic implications but also international ones
the art of diplomacy and multilateral cooperation
One of them will be seen on the level of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), that can be considered as an epicenter of world security. Established in 1945, the UNSC consists of five permanent members with veto rights and ten members elected for two-year term.
As one of the two permanent EU members, alongside France, the United Kingdom has historically been an important player when it came to mediating between the priorities of other EU member states and shaping the common EU position on the international scene [Gowan,2018]. In addition, it has established itself as leader in the agenda-setting of the UNSC , and acquired a reputation as an expert member in the field of peacekeeping and international security [Gifkins, Jarvis & Ralph, 2019]. On these accounts, a future Brexit agreement will likely weaken the positions of both the UK and the EU at the UNSC, opening the possibility for new geopolitical coalitions and political directions.
What are the risks? When accessing the new opportunities for coalitions, one cannot mention the special relationship between the UK and the USA. The Anglo-American partnership, strengthened by common roots and language, has contributed to the success of the UK as a mediator between European and American Interests on the level of the UNSC [Gifkins, Jarvis & Ralph, 2019]. However, with Brexit, Britain might choose to side with the US at the expense of its future former EU partners in order to secure its future trade relationship across the Atlantic .
To be sure, when the UK leaves the EU, France will be the only remaining EU member state that represents EU’s interests as permanent member of the council. But will France accept to take this role? So far, under the leadership of Emanuel Macron, France has, on many occasions, defended its national interests over the EU ones at the UNSC [Gowan, 2018]. With Brexit, it is likely that France will be under pressure to voice the EU position at the UNSC more than any time before. That being said, whether the country will be ready to accept such a responsibility remains to be seen.
As a permanent member of the UNSC, the UK can claim a great record in terms of its contributions to peacekeeping, development aid and protection of human rights – all three areas that the EU views as deeply intertwined. However, once the UK leaves the EU, the latter will be deprived of not only a key negotiator, but also of an important financial contributor. This may weaken the EU in these respective areas. As for the other UNSC permanent members such as China, Russia, and the US, this may open windows of opportunities for them to seeking to undermine the EU positions and change international policy focus [Goldberg, 2016].
What are the incentives for the UK to maintain close ties with the EU post Brexit? There are a number of incentives for the UK to keep its links with the EU after Brexit. Without the EU, and the political and financial support from the 27 member states, the UK will have fewer opportunities to play the role of agenda-setter and key negotiator at the UNSC [Gifkins, Jarvis & Ralph, 2019]. Nevertheless, if the UK decides to support positions different from its traditional ones, as for instance, by supporting China, it will not only further disconnect from the EU, but also lose leverage on the international scene.
In addition, a possible Anglo-American coalition could contribute to the weakening of UK’s reputation, as the actions of the current US President – Donald Trump, have been aimed at undermining the legitimacy of the United Nations itself. The UK has already sided with France and Germany by opposing Trump’s decisions to withdraw from the Iran Deal and re-locate the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. In this view, closer relations between the UK and the US may well lead the former to abandon its core values and international policy strategies.
Furthermore, the priorities of the United Kingdom in the UNSC and in the United Nations as a whole, correspond to the priorities of the European Union. Topics such as conflict prevention, human rights protection, inclusion of women in the peace processes, have ranked high in both sides’ priorities. Such shared concerns may well serve as a basis for a future UK-EU partnership on international level [Perthes, 2018]. Any potential cooperation between them at the UNSC level could sustain and promote their mutual liberal values, while impacting positively international peace and security.
References
Gifkins, J., Jarvis, S. & Ralph, J.[2019] . Global Britain in the United Nations. United Nations Association-United Kingdom, Link: https://www.una.org.uk/sites/default/files/UNA-UK_GlobalBritain_20190207d.pdf
Goldberg, M. [2016]. Big Implications at the UN for Brexit. UN Dispatch 24 June. Link: https://www.undispatch.com/implications-un-brexit/
Gowan, R. [2018], Separation Anxiety: European Influence at the UN After BREXIT. European Council on Foreign Relations, 8 May . Link: https://www.ecfr.eu/publications/summary/separation_anxiety_european_influence_at_the_un_after_brexit
Perthes, V. [2018].What will Brexit mean for European security?. World Economic Forum,, 5 September Link: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/09/sustaining-europe-s-security-trio