Certainty over Brexit, yet Uncertainty remains in the Kingdom

One would not expect, at the least in Western democracies, to see people taking to street, immediately after a new prime minister takes office with a landslide mandate. But, it had happened in Britain. On the evening of the 13^th of December, barely few hours after returning to 10 Downing Street from seeing the Monarch and getting assent to form a new government, PM Johnson had to endure chanting by hundreds of  protesters outside calling for an end to Tory rule. Most notable thing was the dominance of the angry youth among those protesters. If pre-election opinion polls are to be believed, which predicted the Tory landslide too well, then the overwhelming majority of the young had not voted for Johnson’s premiership.

The 12th December election was a gamble that Johnson has won with his instinct that he can exploit the frustrations of a larger populace over Brexit. He made it a single issue election and campaigned on the message ‘Get Brexit Done’. He, therefore, chose to keep his manifesto short and not to make too many promises on socio-economic issues and propose specific programmes. Likewise, the Brexit Party also avoided talking about issues including austerity, health, education, crime, foreign policy etc.  All other opposition parties thought elections for a five-year fixed term parliament should not be about only Brexit and therefore put emphasis on austerity that has been affecting a large number of working families. But, their catchphrase’ Ending austerity, ending poverty’ did not work.

It is for the third time the British electorate have voted on the issue of Brexit. The first one was the referendum where the margin was 52 percent in favour and 48 percent against. A closer scrutiny of the voting pattern showed there was a generational question. While overwhelming majority of the ‘grey voters’ (meaning aged over 55s) voted for the divorce with Europe, majority of ‘green voters’ (under 25s) opted to remain in the union with the continent. The unusual protest on the night of the 13^th December outside Downing Street perhaps explains how those young people feel their futures being put into uncertainty by those same grey voters.   

In the second elections, in which Theresa May lost her majority and cling on to power with the support of Irish unionists, every contesting party promised to carry on the verdict of the  referendum. But, Ms May’s weak mandate and bickering within the party made it impossible to find any smooth exit. It was Johnson and few others who opposed her and quit their ministerial jobs. Had Johnson agreed to endorse Ms May’s deal then Britain would have left the EU as early as in last March or at least in May. But, Johnson and few other extreme Brexiteers had other plans. His ambition was to get the top job in the country. And, following a successful coup within the party against Ms May, Johnson rose to the high office promising a new deal and exit within October. His promise was to die in a ditch rather than extending the union beyond October. He did neither. Instead, he picked up a fight against parliament by misleading the Queen in suspending its sittings, not allowing closer scrutiny despite his renegotiated deal being passed and chose to call an election.  

The difference between Brexit at any cost and the opponents has shifted by just a mere 4 percent. But, those opponents were divided in three groups – revoking the referendum result, calling a second referendum and renegotiate a deal plus a confirmatory referendum. The third option proposed by the Labour was too complex, time consuming and its leader’s neutrality in a confirmatory plebiscite was too confusing to the proponents of other two options. This division definitely hurt the Labour hardest.

As many experts had warned, that going to election when Johnson wanted it would end in Labour losing because of the momentum Johnson enjoyed. Labour and Liberal Democrats and fell in the trap as without their support calling an election would not have been possible. But, both of these two parties were least prepared for any election.  Labour itself was in turmoil for too long. There were tensions among MPs vs grassroots members, Blairites vs trade unionists, pro-Palestinians being labelled as anti-Semite and so on. And, this election was like re-enactment of 2017 contest – where instead of Tories becoming the target of removal from the office, it was all about stopping 'Too-Radical' Corbyn.

There was an unnatural alliance between rightists, populists, billionaires, media barons and pseudo-liberals against Corbyn. It explains why so many pundits in unison are saying that Labour would have done better if they had ditched their leader with a centrist leader. The UK has never seen such one-sided media coverage and disinformation campaign on the social media. A good number of experts suggest that Johnson’s success after a decade long unpopular austerity policies pursued by his party shows that the blame for Labour’s loss squarely falls on Marxist Corbyn. However, electoral history over last three decades show Britain is largely a Conservative country and the only leader who succeeded to bring Labour into power was Tony Blair who had to renege on a number of core values of the party and renamed his right-leaning centrist position as New Labour. Neither Gordon Brown, nor Ed Miliband could bring that success. Rather, Corbyn in 2017 recouped more than 3 million votes out of 5 million lost due to the legacy of Blair’s highly unpopular Iraq war.

This election outcome is now set to bring an end to the most radical leftwing leadership in the Western world. Similarly, Johnson’s rise like a thunder, having lots of similarities with the US President Trump’s stokes memories of Thatcher-Regan duo. President Trump called Johnson’s victory as a harbinger of his re-election. Johnson, with his admiration for Trump, has been emphasising on a trade deal with the US for quite some time. Due to uncertainties in its relationship with Europe in a post-Brexit world, a quicker alignment with the US is very much likely for the UK. Whether that will result in a revival of Neo-Conservatism on the both side of the Atlantic is a big question.

Johnson’s victory will make the divorce easier though, due to his comfortable majority. It will require quite a complex and lengthy negotiations. Until those are concluded Britain will have to abide by European rules and practices and it may force him to seek another extension or else exit without a deal. It will be painful and costly for businesses and economy.

Johnson’s other challenge is about the future of the United Kingdom’s own unity. The Scottish leader, First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon following her party’s spectacular electoral success by capturing over 80 percent seats of the state, has already issued her challenge by saying she will publish her plan for independence referendum within a week. Scotland in 2016 referendum voted to remain in the EU and thereby Brexit process is bound to alienate it further. A similar problem is brewing up in Northern Ireland which also voted against Brexit. Nationalists in Northern Ireland have gained more than the Johnson’s pre-election ally, DUP, who prefer to stay as part of the UK. Johnson’s new deal however has annoyed them as it imposes a virtual border between N Ireland and the rest of the UK. And, the nationalists due to their preference to remain in the EU have indicated they too might call for a referendum on unity with the Irish Republic. Johnson victory might have brought certainty on the question of divorce with the continent, but raised a prospect of disintegration of the Kingdom.

(Published on the Daily Star on December 16, 2019)