By Paul Taylor
No matter how exasperated European Union leaders may be over Brexit, when it comes to Theresa May’s request to delay the U.K.’s departure, they have little choice other than to give the British Prime Minister what she wants.
Despite an escalation in rhetoric by leaders across the Continent, this is one place in the two-year negotiations where the U.K. holds the upper hand.
Frustrated EU governments have been blowing hot and cold, demanding that May give them a clear reason for seeking extra time beyond the March 29 deadline the U.K. set for itself. They have asked her to explain how she plans to break the deadlock in the House of Commons, which has twice rejected the Withdrawal Agreement she negotiated with the EU last November.
“If they want a delay, the British have to explain how they plan to ensure a different outcome,” said Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, comparing May to a “Monty Python” film character, who refuses to admit defeat even after losing all his limbs in a sword fight.
France’s Europe minister, Nathalie Loiseau, said the U.K.’s reasons for submitting a request would have to be “credible, purposeful and supported by a majority.”
Responding to May’s extension request on Wednesday, European Council President Donald Tusk said that granting it would be conditional on ratification of the Brexit deal by MPs.
“I believe that a short extension will be possible, but it will be conditional on a positive vote on the Withdrawal Agreement in the House of Commons,” he said.
Yet despite the rhetoric — and the fact that an extension requires their unanimous consent — EU leaders have less leverage to force May’s hand than such statements imply. They can say “yes” or “no” to Britain’s request for a short extension (which May submitted formally by letter Wednesday). They can question her at Thursday’s summit about her intentions. And they can in theory set a different duration of delay to whatever she requests, to suit themselves rather than Britain. They may hold back their consent until the last minute next week, but ultimately, they will have to comply with her request.
No EU country wants to be blamed for precipitating a no-deal Brexit that would inflict severe economic damage not just on the U.K. but also its nearest neighbors, especially Ireland, France, Belgium and the Netherlands. So, no one is likely to veto a postponement if London requests one.
Nor does the EU have any right to impose terms on May, such as holding a second referendum on whether to leave the bloc at all, calling a general election or abandoning some of the red lines she set before the negotiations began. Doing so would not only violate British sovereignty; it would also set a precedent that could rebound on other member states in future.
“They have no legal right to set any conditions” — Jean-Claude Piris, former head of the legal service of the Council of the European Union
“They have no legal right to set any conditions,” said Jean-Claude Piris, the revered former head of the legal service of the Council of the European Union. “However, they could set a different period from the duration she requests, and that could be very important.”
European Council President Donald Tusk, who will chair the summit, suggested before touring key capitals this week that the EU should be open to considering “a long extension if the U.K. finds it necessary to rethink its Brexit strategy and build consensus around it.” That seems to reflect wishful thinking in Brussels that the Brits could choose to stay if given enough time.
It also seems unlikely. Opposition is rising in Westminster and Brussels against an extension long enough to require the U.K. to elect representatives to the European Parliament in May.
And while a longer delay until the end of this year would allow time for a second referendum or a general election, it would have many drawbacks.
For London, participating in the European Parliament election would be politically embarrassing and might trigger a protest vote that would make any agreement harder.
From the EU’s standpoint, the more serious danger is that as a full member, Britain would be in a position to use its right of veto to obstruct negotiations on the Union’s future seven-year budget and try to blackmail the 27 into concessions on future relations.
While the U.K. has made no such move in the last two years, some radical Brexiteers in May’s Conservative Party are already demanding that London play much harder hardball with Brussels and maximize its nuisance power.
Diplomats say a final decision is unlikely to be taken at this week’s summit. EU leaders will more likely identify a course of action to be implemented at the very last moment by a written procedure — or possibly a hastily arranged emergency summit — depending on what happens in the rollercoaster politics of Westminster next week. But we can expect the final result to be a short extension.
While the 27 have insisted the Withdrawal Agreement cannot be reopened, a three-month delay would nonetheless allow time for the two sides to move closer to an agreement.
May could consult parliament on options for longer-term relations and then renegotiate parts of the political declaration on the U.K.’s future relationship with the EU. The EU could also spell out more specifically the intended future trade framework in an attempt to reduce the likelihood of having to enforce the so-called Irish backstop.
The EU must give the U.K. a last chance to stop procrastinating.
That could help May convince the Northern Ireland Democratic Unionist Party, on whose support she relies in parliament, that the divorce deal does not pose a mortal threat to the unity of the U.K. It would also sufficiently modify the package put to the House of Commons to pass Speaker John Bercow’s test that parliament cannot vote again on the same document.
The EU should take the threats of a Brexiteer-led disruption seriously and limit an extension to three months to keep the heat on parliament to make its mind up. Britain needs an incentive to decide between the very different versions of Brexit endlessly but inconclusively debated.
But the EU must also give the U.K. a last chance to stop procrastinating, choose one kind of cake and eat it, or go cakeless over the cliff.