A decade after the United Kingdom's departure from the European Union (Brexit), two major British newspapers have published analyses examining the issue from different perspectives.
View that the EU did not collapse
According to The Guardian's analysis, Brexit did not lead to the collapse of the EU as some of its supporters had expected. On the contrary, it served as a 'warning' for other member states and encouraged countries to remain or join the bloc.
Following the 2016 referendum, expectations arose that countries like France, the Netherlands, and Italy would also leave the EU. However, these scenarios did not materialize. No country followed the UK in leaving the EU.
According to former European officials, Brexit became an example of the high political and economic cost of leaving the union. This situation reinforced the idea that staying within the EU is safer and more stable than leaving.
Cooperation within the bloc strengthened
According to The Guardian's findings, instead of a wave of disintegration, the European Union has made progress in its enlargement goals, influenced also by Russia's invasion of Ukraine and global geopolitical tensions.
Accession negotiations have begun with Ukraine and Moldova, and the chances for Western Balkan countries have increased. Membership debates have also resurfaced in countries like Iceland and Norway. This reflects a shift in the European mood towards 'closer integration rather than separation'.
The report notes that European cooperation has strengthened in supporting Kyiv and in launching military funding mechanisms like the 'European Peace Facility'. However, some officials acknowledge that the UK's departure has weakened the diversity of economic and regulatory policies in areas such as technology and markets.
Brexit is not an economic failure
An article by Daniel Hannan in The Telegraph argues that, ten years on, Brexit has not been an economic failure as warned by pro-remain campaigners.
Hannan states that the 2016 referendum should be treated as a democratic and final decision, criticizing the persistence of doubts about the vote's legitimacy or calls for a new referendum.
According to the author, the catastrophic scenarios voiced during the remain campaign—such as an immediate recession, market collapse, and rising unemployment—did not come to pass.
Different causes for economic slowdown
The article suggests that the current debate over Brexit's economic impact is exaggerated. It claims that some economic slowdown in the UK is due to internal factors like high taxes, regulations, and strict climate policies, and is not related to leaving the EU.
Hannan argues that the pro-rejoining faction ignores the potential gains of regulatory and trade independence and instead focuses on estimated figures like '4% growth loss'.
Concern over realignment
The article also criticizes the current government's policies. It alleges that, under the guise of 'realignment', gradual concessions are being made to Brussels on issues like harmonizing environmental and trade systems, without securing clear gains in return.
Hannan states these steps reflect political pressure rather than an economically considered choice. He conveys the view of Brexit supporters that, instead of utilizing the benefits of independence from the EU, Britain is indirectly returning to the European sphere of influence through piecemeal policies and accumulating concessions.
