Call us : 0402 082 472

Брекзит / Brexit

Брекзит / Brexit

брексит причины

reports and literature available at his disposal. Nevertheless, this work succeeds in carrying through a coherent message that combines interesting facts and conclusions, which could serve as a starting point for further research of integration processes in EU as well as political processes in Britain which resulted in the vote for Brexit. There is one more reason, however, why Brexit would be a disaster for Europe. The Chinese government is playing for time in Hong Kong in the hope that the demonstrators will lose heart and perhaps the will to resist.

La Chine est de plus en plus influente sur la scène internationale, selon Tony Blair

The rules oblige UK workers to have contributed for a number of years prior to claiming benefits. As a result, D. Cameron needed to avoid a stalemate and to proclaim a substantive victory, however result would depend on the response from other EU capitals. However, the author fails to mention a traditional argument for the British Euroscep-tics that Britain and EU diverge in political traditions.

Brexit could in fact breathe new life into this stalled alliance by creating momentum for a new EU initiative as a show of defiance to British Euroscepticism. But reticence of the French President’s to discuss Brexit брексит новости is not attributed to ideological hostility by the author. Rather, the cause lay in France’s twin economic and political weakness, which “hampers its ability to guide the future course of European integration”29.

RUDN Journal of Political ScienceVestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Politologiya

брексит причины

брексит причины

Thirdly, the growth of political influence of Euroscep-tics led to the vote on EU membership. Lack of reforms within EU which could be suited with the British played into the hands of Eurosceptics who claimed that the EU was unreformable and heading towards federal union. Fourthly, there was organized and well-funded opposition, namely, the Party of independence of the United Kingdom.

  • As the planned economy in the former Soviet Union began to collapse, the private enforcement and interest groups suddenly became “almost all that remained of the institutional infrastructure” (Braguinsky).
  • It is devoted to the key topic in international discussions — Britain’s exit from the EU.
  • London has as much to offer continental interests (a conduit for independence from regulation) as the EU has to offer the UK in return.
  • A decade after the Great Recession, Europe’s economy is still convalescing, and another period of prolonged hardship would cause serious, potentially dangerous economic and political damage.
  • Cameron, after improving the terms of membership the referendum was to reconcile two opposing camps by the results of vote to which the minority would be compelled to obey.

In 2017 the government stated its position in two White Papers and reports on the preliminary results of negotiations by the government members. British and would enable Eurosceptics to claim that EU was unreformed brexit новости and was moving to a federative superstate. Secondly, severe criticism from mass media which not only drowned the statements of Europhiles, but also heated the anti-European moods due to manipulation by the facts.

Blair made the remarks during an exclusive interview with China Central Television (CCTV) on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum 2018 in Davos, Switzerland. On the whole, despite the fact that some of the author’s observations have become obsolete in the result of the pace of developments since the book’s publication, the research by A. Glencross remains an important and historically sensitive account of this political event which proved to be decisive for the domestic as well as foreign policy of the UK.

A. Glenkross assumes that D. Cameron was confident of winning the referendum on the basis of a pragmatism and bean-counting evaluation. However, the public opinion “was out of step with the government cost — benefit argument” and “David Cameron’s gamble proved a great miscalculation”4. The author ranks the 2016 referendum amongst the major political blunders of British Prime Ministers which caused shock waves across Europe and North Atlantic. The decision to delegate responsibility to the people ended up costing him his position as Prime Minister.

One of the benefits of work is that the author, among big number of referendums which took place in other EU countries on the European policy (about 50), managed to reveal the novelty of the British approach. A.

The success on elections in European Parliament of populist Party of Independence of the United Kingdom was connected in the book with the general negative perception of EU and the requirement to restrict immigration from other EU countries. The author accuses T. Blair’s government of the scale of potential labour migration and chose not to impose transitional controls after the 2004 enlargement21. He mentions that even the Europhile wing in the Conservative Party recognized that enormous gains that the free movement of EU citizens offers, such as capital mobility and free labour movement, provides UK businesses with a vast pool of resources with which to innovate and grow, can be realized but only on the basis of accepting constrains on immigration policy. As it becomes known from the book, the Eurosceptics demanded unilateral concessions for the UK, such as parliamentary veto on European legislative procedure, as well as concessions on fundamental principles of EU, in particular, concerning free movement of EU citizens22.

EU heads of states and leaders of EU institutions were equally taken aback by this unprecedented reverse for European integration. A decade after the Great Recession, Europe’s economy is still convalescing, and another period of prolonged hardship would cause serious, potentially брексит dangerous economic and political damage. With monetary and fiscal policy unlikely to provide enough stimulus, policymakers should explore alternative options. that we do not seem to come to an agreement in what shape or form such a European unification can work.

Glenkross agrees with the false opinion of the historian R. Granieri5, which regards the choice made by British voters as anti-EU, because “at no time has Britain actively sought to undermine an organization within which it was already a member”6. Moreover, he recognizes unexpectedness of the result for the academics because “there are no navigational charts for the course that now needs to be plotted”.

брексит причины