Premium
Rosinenpickerei: Wer hat Angst vorm bösen Wolf?
Author(s) -
Tangermann Stefan
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
eurochoices
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.487
H-Index - 15
eISSN - 1746-692X
pISSN - 1478-0917
DOI - 10.1111/1746-692x.12202
Subject(s) - brexit , negotiation , harm , european union , argument (complex analysis) , politics , law and economics , political science , single market , economics , political economy , international trade , law , biochemistry , chemistry
Summary In my view, Brexit is a tragedy, for both the UK and the EU ‐27, in both political and economic terms. Negotiations on future trade relations between the UK and the EU ‐27 should at least aim at minimising the economic harm. Unfortunately the attitude of the EU ‐27 revealed so far in the Brexit negotiations does not appear to point in that direction. The philosophy behind the negotiating stance of the EU ‐27 seems to aim at punishing the UK for its decision to exit the Union. The EU ‐27 have enforced a sequence of items to be negotiated that is not logical. Rather than seeking to maximise mutual benefit, the EU ‐27 appear to see trade with the UK as a zero‐sum game. EU ‐27 representatives reproach the UK time and again for ‘cherry picking’, negating the fact that trade negotiations have always been based on a request and offer approach. The argument, advanced by the EU ‐27, that the four freedoms of the Single Market are indivisible lacks economic logic. Trade is a (partial) substitute for free movement of workers. Even if not all elements of the Single Market can be agreed with the UK , implementing as many of them as possible would make good economic sense.