Press

“We’ve learnt nothing [about Brexit] because it suits Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn to say next to nothing about it,” said Charles Grant, director of the independent Centre for European Reform think-tank.“The political leaders have conspired to pull the wool over the eyes of the British people and avoid explaining that Brexit means painful choices.”

Officials liken the [Brexit] process to accession negotiations in reverse. That is not reassuring for Britain: as Charles Grant of the Centre for European Reform, a think-tank, notes, accession talks consist more of take-it-or-leave-it offers than real negotiations. And so far the EU 27 have proved both united and hardline.

The remaining 27 members of the EU would “cautiously welcome Theresa May having a larger majority,” John Springford, policy director of research at Centre for European Reform, tells Quartz. “It means they have someone with a strong personal mandate to negotiate with and any agreement that they put together is less likely to fall apart.”

But in the event of a hard Brexit, these cracks may become crevices. Post-Brexit “security co-operation will be weakened”, says Camino Mortera-Martinez, an expert in home affairs at the Centre for European Reform. “It doesn't mean there will be more attacks, but it does mean that it will be difficult to cooperate smoothly and quickly.”

“The risk for the British if they ally themselves too closely to Trump is that they will give the impression that Britain and the US are now very much of the same mindset,” says Ian Bond of the Centre for European Reform. “They will look like two nations that are prepared to back out of international treaties, [are] committed to heavy deregulation, to maintaining low tax economies and courting the current wave of populism in their nations.”

The UK has imposed a diversion of effort upon its partners at an exceptionally testing time. It has undermined the credibility of a project viewed as existential by many of its members, including its most powerful ones. Brexiters have poured ridicule and scorn on the whole venture. Now they imagine the UK can refuse the EU’s terms for an amicable divorce and yet still count upon active and enthusiastic co-operation in ensuring the smooth flow of trade. The idea of “no deal” is just ridiculous [writes John Springford and Simon Tilford of the Centre for European reform].

John Springford and Simon Tilford of the Centre for European Reform argue, there are three ways in which a “cliff edge” Brexit would severely damage the UK economy. EU tariffs would immediately be payable on imports from Britain, averaging about 4 per cent but varying hugely. British car exports would face a 10 per cent tariff. This would be hugely damaging for the motor industry, which relies on components crossing borders many times before a vehicle is assembled.