The bill

If you were to believe the news grinders of the world, which need an event that shakes the world every thirty minutes, for their business to work, Great Britain should have sunk like a New Atlantis, under the huge tidalwave of the flood. The one started by the unexpected vote of the population in favor of exiting the EU system. Well, it hasn't sunk! The pound has lost 10% in just a few hours, but it has then returned to a level that doesn't hint at, nor start the financial catastrophe. All the stock market indexes, in Europe, America and Asia fell between 3 and 6%, but the subsequent trading has erased much of the drop. Many people, including the whole British society, will be marked by the consequences of the vote, but nobody has packed up their bags to migrate to the US, Canada or New Zealand, starting Monday. That doesn't mean that the bill of the "great democratic exercise", like David Cameron called the farce that he played upon himself, it is not already on the table. And someone has to foot it! Usually, when the bill comes, discrepancies appear, disagreements and controversies occur and it isn't always true that everyone pays their part in full! Some pay more, some pay less, others don't pay at all!

The bill for the British policy, institutions, parties and people, is the first to come due. The delayed resignation, in other words not on the next day, but in autumn, is the first in a long string of political costs that will materialize, some in the near future, others in the next decades.

What matters much more than the fate of one or another of the politicians of the moment, is, however, what will happen to the political institutions, starting with the parties and ending with the State. It is possible that Cameron's forced succession will save the Conservative Party from a breakup that amounts to its dissolution. However, the wounds of the fratricidal battle, waged inside the party, to dislodge the current prime-minister and to make room for another "team" at the table for government positions and glory, won't heal so easily, as demonstrated by the perpetuation of the pro and anti-Thatcher sides among the conservatives, decades after the Iron Lady's involvement in politics. The other question is whether and how much will the UKIP capitalize politically on the anti-European voters' victory. Until the next elections the consequences of the exit will not materialize economically and socially. That is why it is not impossible that the traditional bipolarity of the UK political scene gets replaced by a trinity, or even worse, to see the UKIP join the dominant two-party system. More dramatic than what will happen to the political leaders and to the political parties in Great Britain is what will happen to the state structures. On the very morning when the announcement of the Brexit victory was made, reactions from the Scotland and Northern Ireland areas were not only quick but also bold. Northern Ireland would be more willing to become part of the Republic of Ireland and thus stay in the EU, than to become part of a Great Britain isolated from Europe! That would certainly be a blow! The same message, easy to anticipate, came from Scotland! Not one territorial unit in the "highlands" voted in favor of exiting the EU!!! Not even one!!! It is clear that a repeat of the referendum that took place two years ago would certainly produce different results, accrediting Scotland as an independent state, member of the European Union. All of these together, would mean the de-facto and legal disappearance of the entity called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland! Not even the current Ruling House of Windsor can be sure of its survival as an institution!!! What even Oliver Cromwell has failed to do, by beheading Charles the 1st, the Brexit may achieve peacefully: the replacement of a monarchy, grafted onto a well balanced democracy, with an ad-hoc, republican structure, called at the time "The Commonwealth of England" (1649-1653) !!! All of this history could take Great Britain by storm over the next few years, just like the inertial forces set to work by the political establishment and the Crown may succeed in keeping the separatist tendencies. Great Britain has entered the completely uncharted territory! Completely unknown, where "black swans" are all over the place!!!

And lastly, the UK politicians will have to set the schedule for measures which will begin, de jure, the procedures for exiting the EU. David Cameron has already made the first move intended to speed up the painful procedures and consequences. It has left the task of the official announcement in Brussels to the future conservative prime-minister, most likely Boris Johnson. How long could this announcement be delayed? Theoretically there is no preset delay between the referendum which led to the exit vote and the official actions, in Brussels, of the government in London. A government with more wisdom than the one struck by Cameron, could credibly tell its own electorate and the rest of Europe: Great Britain needs a preparation for exiting, especially at the level of business and the economy. Only then will the official procedures for exiting the EU begin! It is possible, perhaps even very likely, the exit will be postponed in that way, not two, but four, five or even, why not?, ten years!!! After the official announcement in Brussels concerning the decision to leave the European Union come two years of negotiations needed to achieve, sign and ratify the "divorce agreement". If an agreement isn't reached, the parties can, by mutual agreement, extend the duration of the negotiations! How much? As long as they want!!! In other words, even after the reopening of the negotiations to exit the EU, the breakup doesn't automatically become effective, not even after two years, not even at the end of the negotiation. The agreement needs the vote of the qualified majority of the European Council and it is not certain that it will be obtained anyway. In other words, certain member countries might have specific objections concerning certain provisions and asking their revisions through other negotiations. Completing and approving the exit agreement would become a procedure without a set deadline for completion, in spite of the two years mentioned by art. 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. And until these procedures aren't followed through from A to Z, Great Britain remains a rightful member of the EU and part of its economic, institutional, judicial and decisional mechanisms!!! Of course, the rupture can also intervene through the unilateral will of the country that is asking to leave the EU, but in this option, the terms of the breakup are simply dictated by the EU!!! Who could politically take on such an option when the votes in favor of the exit barely exceed half of the number of voters by 2%?

Another key question is: what approach will the EU take in the exit negotiations with the EU? Will a simply (strictly) punitive alternative, or one that doesn't leave room for arrangements to get back in. For the second alternative, a precedent is Denmark's case, which, in 1992, has rejected through a referendum the adoption of the Maastricht Treaty, only to then, after obtaining certain derogations and exemptions from its provisions, organize a new referendum just one year later, which sealed the adoption of the treaty and the continuation of the EU membership!!!! As can be seen, the bill of the British policy is pretty long! The solutions make up a complicated labyrinth, in which time can dilate uncontrollably and one which it is uncertain if the state entity called Great Britain will ever come out in one piece from!