Our current political situation couldn’t be more interesting. Besides global problems on terrorism, global warming and wars all around the world, there is one major topic in our news: it’s the EU with its internal problems from financing Greece to internal stability. The last mentioned point will be subject of that paper, because Britain is deeply divided about the proposed referendum on United Kingdom’s Membership in the European Union, respectively its opportunities and risks.
During the last election in the UK, Prime Minister David Cameron took the referendum into the manifesto of his Conservative Party because of the annual debates about costs and benefits from the EU and after winning the election he now has to stand up for it. The back then started campaign »Let Britain decide« will now reveal, whether or not the Brits want to stay or not.
t is not unreasonable to think about Britain leaving the EU as, for example, Anthony Forster lists the historically settled problems between Europe and Great Britain in his book-summary like it is inevitable for the UK to leave. And talking about the legality of that referendum is therefore not an option, because Article 50 TEU (Treaties of the European Union) settles the possibility of a voluntary resignation (cf. Streinz et al. 2008: 38-39).
The main part of the seminar paper is going to start, after introducing the topic in the initiation, with an analytically and descriptively chapter of analysing the pros and cons of leaving the EU. The first section of the main part is therefore divided in two parts, the opportunities and the risks. In the course of doing this, the perspective is clearly aligned to the UK itself, so that one should be able to decide, whether or not it will be good for the British people to vote yes or no and which decision they should take. Possible consequences for the EU are completely hidden, because it doesn’t matter for the Brits, who take part in this referendum. In addition to that there will be an analytic part of discussing the meaning of the mentioned opportunities and risks as section two of the main part. Subsequently, in an overview chapter, the advantages and disadvantages are going to be compared to each other to be able to qualify both of them. The final conclusion will take place in Chapter 5, in which the paper will be finished with an outlook and an analysis which option to take.
Table of Contents
1. Initiation
a. Subject of the paper
b. Structure of the paper
c. Methodical Approach
d. Status of research
2. For a more detailed analysis, » Awkwardness and reliability« by Michael Melcher can be highly recommended. It is an extensive overview of British policy, which is able to explain a lot of its specifics.
a. Definitions
3. Opportunities
a. Budget
b. European Restrictions/ Interventions
i. Economy
c. Awkward Partner
d. Human Rights
4. Risks
a. Economy
i. Finance Sector
b. Benefits from the EU
5. All you need to do: square the circle?
6. Count pros and cons and just decide?
7. Final Conclusion
Objectives and Core Themes
This paper examines the proposed referendum on the United Kingdom's membership in the European Union, focusing on a balanced analytical evaluation of the opportunities and risks associated with a potential Brexit. The research explores how historical and political factors, economic considerations, and the British identity influence the current debate, with the primary objective being to provide a structured overview of why the UK might choose to leave or remain in the EU.
- Analysis of economic impacts, including the UK budget and the financial sector.
- Evaluation of British sovereignty, European restrictions, and Human Rights policies.
- Investigation of the "Awkward Partner" dynamic and British national identity.
- Assessment of the feasibility of post-Brexit economic models (e.g., Swiss or Norwegian examples).
- Examination of the emotional and political dimensions of the referendum.
Excerpt from the Book
3. Opportunities
The »Süddeutsche Zeitung« quotes that it was always more important for London “[…] die europäische Integration zu behindern“ (Bahr 2014). So why should one stay in a community that has changed through the last 40 years from a system of economic cooperation to a political system, which seems to be not relevant (cf. Volkery 2013)? In general EU critics believe that “[…] Britain is being held back by the EU, which they say imposes too many rules on business and charges billions of pounds a year in membership fees for little in return.” Moreover Britain should “[…] take back full control of its borders” (BBC 2015). That is why you have to look at both, advantages and disadvantages to be able to take the correct decision. Here are some more reasons for leaving in detail:
a. Budget
Volkery thinks that budget is one of the most important points and he’s not alone with this opinion about this advantage of leaving the EU: Zuleeg names it “[…] an area where a UK exit would have a major impact is the EU budget” (Zuleeg 2014). But why seems the budget to be so important? Because Great Britain is one of the biggest net contributors in Europe. This is why they think that paying that much in relation to getting that less is not very useful indeed.
Summary of Chapters
1. Initiation: Introduces the background of the Brexit referendum, the relevance of the political climate, and the methodological approach used in the paper.
2. For a more detailed analysis...: Establishes foundational definitions of terms like EU, Europe, and Britain to ensure clarity throughout the subsequent analysis.
3. Opportunities: Analyzes the potential benefits of leaving the EU, focusing on budget savings, freedom from restrictive regulations, and national sovereignty.
4. Risks: Discusses the dangers of an exit, particularly concerning the potential loss of access to the European single market and the significant impact on the London financial sector.
5. All you need to do: square the circle?: Investigates whether the UK could maintain economic cooperation while leaving the political union, concluding this is unlikely.
6. Count pros and cons and just decide?: Explores the complexity of the decision, emphasizing that it cannot be reduced to simple economic math but involves emotional and political factors.
7. Final Conclusion: Summarizes the key arguments and suggests that the referendum is fundamentally an emotional and political expression of the British national identity.
Keywords
Brexit, United Kingdom, European Union, Referendum, Sovereignty, Economy, Financial Sector, British Identity, Westminster model, EU Regulations, Trade Policy, Political Union, Human Rights, Economic Cooperation, Euroscepticism
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this paper?
The paper evaluates the opportunities and risks associated with the potential withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, commonly known as Brexit.
What are the primary thematic pillars discussed?
The core themes include economic consequences (budget and finance), political sovereignty, the "Awkward Partner" phenomenon, and the influence of British identity and culture on the referendum.
What is the main goal or research question?
The goal is to provide an analytical framework that allows a comprehensive understanding of the arguments for and against Brexit, rather than advocating for one side.
What methodology does the author utilize?
The paper uses an analytical and descriptive evaluation of scientific literature, government reports, and contemporary newspaper articles to examine the topical debate.
What does the main body cover?
It covers the specific advantages of leaving (budget, deregulation), the significant risks (economic instability, loss of market access), and the philosophical and political motivations behind the push for an exit.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Keywords include Brexit, sovereignty, economic impact, European Union, Westminster model, and national identity.
How does the paper characterize the "City of London" in the context of Brexit?
The City is viewed as a vital part of the British economy whose dependence on European financial markets poses one of the biggest risks in the event of an exit.
Why does the author argue that "squaring the circle" is not a viable strategy?
The author argues that the EU would not allow the UK to maintain full access to the single market without adhering to EU regulations and paying membership-related costs.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Philipp Freund (Autor:in), 2015, Opportunities and Risks of the Proposed Referendum on United Kingdom's Membership in the EU (BREXIT), München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/313570
