After ten years since Britain's departure from the European Union (Brexit), two major British newspapers published analyses examining the issue from different perspectives.
View that the EU did not collapse
According to The Guardian's analysis, Brexit did not lead to the collapse of the EU as some of its supporters expected. Instead, it served as a 'warning' for other members of the union and encouraged countries to remain or join.
After the 2016 referendum, expectations arose that countries such as France, the Netherlands, and Italy might also leave the EU. However, these scenarios did not materialize. No country left the EU following Britain.
According to former European officials, Brexit became an example of the high political and economic cost of leaving the union. This reinforced the idea that staying within the EU is safer and more stable than leaving.
Cooperation strengthened
According to The Guardian's observations, instead of a wave of disintegration, the European Union progressed with its expansion goals, influenced by Russia's invasion of Ukraine and global geopolitical tensions.
Accession negotiations began with Ukraine and Moldova, and the prospects for Western Balkan countries improved. Membership discussions also resurfaced in countries like Iceland and Norway. This reflects a shift in the European mood towards 'closer integration instead of separation.'
The report notes that European cooperation strengthened in support for Kyiv and in launching military funding mechanisms like the 'European Peace Facility.' However, some officials acknowledge that Britain's departure weakened diversity in economic and regulatory policies in areas such as technology and markets.
Brexit is not an economic failure
The article by Daniel Hannan in The Telegraph argues that, ten years after Brexit, it is not an economic failure as pro-EU campaigners warned.
Hannan states that the 2016 referendum should be treated as a democratic and final decision, criticizing the persistence of doubts about the legitimacy of the vote or calls for a new referendum.
According to the writer, catastrophic scenarios voiced during the remain campaign, such as an immediate recession, market collapse, and rising unemployment, did not occur.
Different reasons for economic slowdown
The article suggests that the current debate about Brexit's economic impact is exaggerated. It claims that some economic slowdown in Britain is due to internal factors like high taxes, regulations, and strict climate policies, unrelated to leaving the EU.
Hannan argues that the pro-EU re-join faction ignores the potential gains of regulatory and trade independence, focusing instead on estimated figures like '4% growth loss.'
Concern over gradual re-alignment
The article also criticises the current government's policies. It alleges that under the guise of 're-alignment,' gradual concessions are being made to Brussels on issues such as harmonising environmental and trade systems, without obtaining clear benefits in return.
Hannan notes that these steps reflect political pressure rather than a considered economic choice. He conveys the view of Brexit supporters that Britain, instead of utilising the benefits of independence from the EU, is indirectly returning to European influence through piecemeal policies and accumulating concessions.
