Quartz: The “reverse Greenland”: One solution that could prevent dismantling the United Kingdom after Brexit

While the political dust settles, leaders in Scotland and Gibraltar are also looking at another, more middle-ground option: a federated membership of the UK, which they hope will allow them to retain their EU status whilst still remaining within the United Kingdom.

Senior figures in the Scottish Labour party are reportedly consulting with constitutional lawyers to look into a new federal system. And it’s not just devolved regions interested, the Labour initiative is also exploring whether the federal system could also be applied to English regions that voting to stay in the EU, such as London. The mayor, Sadiq Khan, has acknowledged that the British capital needs more say. [...]

There is perhaps some precedent for this proposed federal system. The Danish Realm is made up of three countries: Denmark, Greenland, and the Faroe Islands. Denmark joined the European Economic Community, the predecessor to the EU, in 1973. By 1979, Greenland gained autonomy from Denmark and seceded from the EU in 1985. The Faroe Islands have also chosen to remain outside the EU.

read the article 

Salon: The geography of Brexit: Britain’s referendum reveals a United Kingdom that’s anything but

For the past 30 years the principal aim of government economic policy has been, arguably, to protect London’s position, particularly as a financial center, while leaving the rest of the country largely ignored. In the U.K. version of trickle-down economics, London is the golden goose whose droppings fertilize the rest of the country. In reality there was not much trickle and the U.K., like the U.S., is becoming a more unequal society.

There is a spatial dimension to this social inequality. The U.K. has the most marked regional inequality in Europe. The rich and wealthy are concentrated in London and the South East where household incomes are higher than the rest of the country. As the U.K. became a more unequal and divided society, the cleavage between London and the South East compared to the rest of the country is becoming more marked. [...]

What happened? The EU provided benefits to Scotland that the London-biased U.K. government did not. Scotland’s political culture, it turns out, is closer to the EU than that of London-based Tories. And years of punishing Thatcher rule in the 1980s soured many in Scotland against a reliance on the U.K. political system. The EU softened the neoliberalism of English Tory rule.

read the article

The Washington Post: Why Iran was so quick to praise Brexit

While the international community squirmed in distress when Britain voted to leave the European Union, there was one country which was quick to voice its optimism: Iran. Even though only a few Iranian political and military leaders decided to speak about Brexit, the ones who did expressed support and even enthusiasm for the referendum. [...]

Some Iranian officials see a Britain outside of the E.U. as a major geopolitical reshuffle that might give the country more leverage in a political environment that has historically been against them. [...]

Though they haven't gone into detail, it's possible to speculate that some Iranian officials were thrilled with the announcement for economic reasons. Europe is an important trading partner with Iran. And as an emerging market, some Iranian officials believe that they stand to benefit from business opportunities. In addition to having an easier time making business deals  with individual European countries such as Italy, Greece or Spain, as Buzzfeed's Borzou Daragahi points out, Britain might also stand to benefit.

read the article 

Forbes: How Europe Was Lost: Five Ways The 'Remain' Campaign Failed In Britain's European Union Referendum

What are the answers to these questions? Mostly, they have not been articulated or done so without conviction or passion. Instead, there have been threats of emergency budgets, defensive manoeuvres over immigration and a barely defended war of words over the alleged undemocratic nature of the EU. No wonder many of the electorate now say they did not know what the vote was all about. [...]

There should have been a mission, a reforming zeal, a continued passion for the European project – something that’s unparalleled in the history of the continent. Britain leads the world’s advertising industry. What were none of its brand message leaders up to the task of getting the message right? [...]

The lack of a powerful, positive Remain campaign meant its cause was constantly playing a defensive catch-up game to the other side’s agenda. “Leave” fought with conviction on issues that it knew mattered to people. Immigration, with its alleged effects on jobs and housing was allowed to move to center stage, while the constant mantra that the EU is undemocratic was so successful that it passed into public parlance without much debate. [...]

The resulting uncertainty is clear to see in the stock and currency markets’ reaction to the vote. Yet it would not have been difficult to have put much better contingency plans in place.

read the article 

The Washington Post: Brexit is not just Europe’s problem. It highlights a crisis in democracies worldwide.

Britain’s political system remained in turmoil Monday, virtually leaderless and with the two major parties divided internally. But the meltdown that has taken place in the days after voters decided to break the country’s ties with Europe is more than a British problem, reflecting an erosion in public confidence that afflicts democracies around the world.

Last Thursday’s Brexit vote cast a bright light on the degree to which the effects of globalization and the impact of immigration, along with decades of overpromises and under-delivery by political leaders, have undermined the ability of those officials to lead. This collapse of confidence has created what amounts to a crisis in governing for which there seems no easy or quick answer. [...]

The seeds of what has brought Britain to this moment exist elsewhere, which makes this country’s problems the concern of leaders elsewhere. In Belgium and Brazil, democracies have faced crises of legitimacy; in Spain and France, elected leaders have been hobbled by their own unpopularity; even in Japan, where Prime Minister Shinzo Abe faces no threat from the opposition, his government has demonstrated a consistent inability to deliver prosperity.

Anthony King, a professor of politics at the University of Essex, said the underlying factor is that many people no longer believe that, however imperfect things are economically, they will keep getting better.

read the article