From I J Review
On June 23rd, the United Kingdom will vote to determine whether it remains a member nation of the European Union, in what is perhaps the most impactful event in Europe since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Both President Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron are in agreement that the UK must remain a member of the EU. Obama recently said very directly that the UK would be relegated to the “back of the queue” for a trade agreement with the US if they exit the EU. Cameron warned Brits of the “illusion of sovereignty.” His argument, like Obama’s, is that the UK would be left out of decision-making that would affect the country if it chose to “Brexit.” He ended by claiming, “True sovereignty lies in control.”
But the reality is that the EU model increasingly restricts British sovereignty and is potentially harming their economy and prospective trade deals with other countries, including the United States. As our closest European ally, it is in the United States’ best interest that the UK leaves the EU. As a result, the newfound partnership could invigorate and strengthen both economies as well as ensure the safety and security of each nation.
Critics claim that Brexit will drastically impact the stability of Britain’s economy without considering the role the Brussels regulations have had on UK markets. If the EU were truly magnifying British ideals, statistics would not show that the three fastest growing export markets are outside the EU. The UK is unable to negotiate trade deals beneficial to its specified needs because Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg set about fifty-five percent of British legislation.
Despite these setbacks, the UK’s exports to non-EU countries are growing twice as fast as exports to EU member nations, and the three strongest import markets exist outside the EU. Brexit would also lower overall food prices by removing EU quotas for food and handouts to farmers. Unfortunately, British trade negotiations with thriving economies like India, Japan and the UAE have been stifled by the weight of EU regulations and bureaucracy.
Over the last century, the US has had no closer European supporter than it has in Britain. As free-market capitalists, we share the belief that one of the best ways to quell global unrest is through economic growth. For decades America has been the bastion of economic prosperity, a position strengthened by close relations with nations not bound by overbearing, bureaucratic governing structures like the EU.
When outgoing President Obama said the UK would be moved to the “back of the queue” he was basing this on the assumption that the next presidential administration will adopt his ideology. This is a stretch as both major-party candidates align to the right of his foreign policy and will be forced to face the reality that US negotiations with the EU have fallen flat, because the EU is swayed by a variety of influences and French-inspired economic nationalism, which does not correspond well with America’s interests.
In regard to security, Brexit might offer greater stability for both countries. While the Chinese continue to test the waters in the South China Sea, Brexit would offer an opportunity to prevent the Chinese from accessing the European Union as well as stop them from using the UK as a bridge to get there.
EU bureaucrats have failed miserably at answering the massive migration crisis and subsequently the growing terror cells birthing throughout Europe. Under current EU regulation, the UK is obliged to accept all persons entering the country, regardless of skill level or background, whom then take precedence over highly-competent migrants with skills to contribute to the national GDP and create jobs for the lesser-qualified. Without the EU mandating migrant quotas, the UK could return to strengthening its internal job markets, and firmly define their immigration policies.
Read Full Story At I J Review
