Gibraltar, British Overseas Territory in Spain’s southernmost tip, could prove a sticking point in the UK’s exit negotiations with the European Union. Over the weekend, European Council President Donald Tusk published a letter containing the bloc’s guidelines for the split with Britain, or Brexit, a process that could take as long as two years. The letter contains a passage that quickly angered the British government and the leader of Gibraltar, which Britain captured in 1704:

After the United Kingdom leaves the Union, no agreement between the EU and the UK may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without the agreement between the kingdom of Spain and the UK.

In the days since the letter’s publication, the governments of Britain and Gibraltar reacted strongly to the EU’s concession to Spain, which is an EU member. In an interview with Reuters on Monday, Gibraltar’s chief minister, Fabian Picardo, said the passage was “clear Spanish bullying.” He added that Tusk “is behaving like a cuckolded husband who is taking it out on the children.”

The spat has even led a former MP to suggest that British Prime Minister Theresa May was willing to go to war to defend the territory of 30,000 people. In response to the strong reactions, Spain’s Foreign Minister Alfonso Dastis said his government “is a little surprised by the tone of comments coming out of Britain, a country known for its composure.” But May insists there will be no military conflict, and that further negotiations will smooth out any concerns. “We want to negotiate the best possible deal for the UK and the best possible deal for Gibraltar,” she said.

Britain’s exit from the EU, which 52 percent of the country supported in last June’s referendum, officially began last week, when May triggered Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Many expect the divorce to be a painful one, and Britain’s waning influence in Europe was evident with Tusk’s mention of Gibraltar in his guidelines for the split.

Gibraltar overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU (98 percent), but it has also repelled Spanish attempts at governing the “Rock,” as it’s affectionally nicknamed. In a 2002 referendum, 98 percent of the populace voted against a proposal for joint British-Spanish sovereignty. According to British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson, a vocal proponent of the Leave campaign last summer, the territory’s status will not change anytime soon. “The sovereignty of Gibraltar is unchanged and is not going to change,” he said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Could Gibraltar Derail the Brexit Negotiations? appeared first on Law Street.

On June 23, the United Kingdom held its long-awaited vote on whether or not to stay in the European Union. In a somewhat surprising development, 30 million people across the U.K. voted to leave the European Union. In the end, Leave voters won with 52 percent of the vote while Remain had 48 percent, in an election with the nation’s highest voter turnout since 1992.

While the debate over whether to leave the Union generated acrimony between the two sides involved, it also held the potential to leave a much larger impact on the world at large. Read on to find out more about the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union, nicknamed Brexit, the immediate impact on the nation and the possible regional and global ramifications that may still play out.

The United Kingdom and the European Union

The European Union has its origins in the European Coal and Steel Community, an agreement made between six countries, notably including France and Germany, following World War II in an effort to prevent future wars. The agreement quickly evolved into the European Economic Community in 1957, furthering ideas such as free trade and free movement, which serve as the basis of the EU today.

Britain at first was hesitant to join, seeing itself as above the Union and on par with the great post-war powers such as the United States and the Soviet Union. However, following sluggish economic growth in the 1960s, Britain eventually reached out about joining. Britain finally joined in 1973 but in 1975, almost immediately after joining, the country actually had its first referendum on whether or not to stay in the union. In that case, the Remain vote was overwhelming.

Despite the positive referendum results, Britain’s two major political parties, Conservative and Labour, took turns decrying the EU and suggesting an exit during the 1970s and 1980s. Ultimately, though, the nation remained with some caveats, such as not buying into the union’s single currency. Support for the union increased and remained steady within British ruling politics throughout the 1990s and early 2000s. Things began to turn on their irrevocable course beginning in 2005 when David Cameron assumed leadership of the Conservative Party.

Cameron had incorporated Euro-skeptics into his winning coalition and thus had to agree to policies that began distancing Britain from the EU. That move was combined with the rise of anti-immigration sentiment, anti-EU parties, and the EU’s own economic decline following the Great Recession. As part of his most recent election victory in 2015, Cameron promised a referendum on Britain’s EU membership, which ultimately led to Brexit.

Brexit

Clearly, the Brexit vote was a long time in the making as Britain seemingly always had one foot out the door. The argument took two sides. Those who opposed exiting the EU believed that Britain, as a small island, needed to be part of a larger unit to continue to enjoy economic success and to remain secure. Conversely, those campaigning against the EU decried the perceived growing overreach from Brussels (where EU institutions are located), which they contend threatens Britain’s very sovereignty.

The Remain camp was led by then Prime Minister David Cameron, who essentially staked his reputation and political career on voters deciding to remain in the European Union. Within the U.K., Cameron was supported by most of his own Conservative Party, the opposing Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, and the Scottish National Party. Globally his coalition was strengthened by notable world leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Chinese President Xi Jinping, and President Barack Obama. Most major businesses and prominent economists also supported staying in the union.

The opposition was headed by the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) then led by Nigel Farage. Supporting him were other members of Cameron’s own party including, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove. Those in favor of exiting the European Union were also endorsed by far-right parties across Europe including in France, Germany, and the Netherlands. To learn more about the recent rise of right-wing, nationalist groups in Europe check out this Law Street explainer.

To formally leave the European Union, the U.K. must invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which was signed in 2007. According to Article 50, the U.K. will have up to two years to negotiate with other EU members the conditions of its exit covering everything from trade to immigration. Experts, however, contend the negotiations could take much longer. No one is entirely certain of how the process will work out–the U.K. is the first country to leave the EU-and until the negotiations are complete, conditions will remain the same as they are currently. The video below looks at the consequences of Brexit:

The Fallout

Although no one knew for sure what exactly the impact would be if the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, many predicted it would be unfavorable. The speculation seemed to become a reality both economically and politically for the island nation.

While consumer spending has remained relatively flat, there are a number of other indicators that suggest not all is well. This starts with the British Pound, which quickly lost one-tenth of its value against the dollar and the FTSE 250, a domestic British index, which has also lost significant value. Additionally, hiring has gone down, while unemployment may be increasing. This quagmire is further complicated by business investment, which has also been shrinking. Even hope that a reduced Pound would lead to more travel seems quelled as inflation is rising faster than the increase in tourism.

Britain is not only struggling economically but politically as well. Following the Brexit vote, then Prime Minister David Cameron, who had wagered his career on remaining in the European Union, resigned. This move was followed by a wave of uncertainty as the main opposing party to Cameron, the Labour Party, dealt with a leadership challenge of its own and two of the major candidates for the Prime Minister position dropped out of contention.

While Theresa May ultimately assumed control of the Conservative Party, her new cabinet is a hodge-podge of those in favor of remaining in the EU and those for Brexit, including Boris Johnson who was one of the people who recently dropped out of contention for the role of Prime Minister. Although the Conservative party remains in flux, the Labour party has turned into a disaster with the leader refusing to step down despite a no-confidence vote, leading to an internal struggle.

Regional Impact

Aside from what occurred in England, is what happened and what might happen within the United Kingdom at large. Although England and Wales both voted to leave the European Union, Scotland and Northern Ireland voted with greater majorities to stay. While this may be less of a problem if these were different states within a country, they are actually all independent countries.

After all, it was only last year that the nation of Scotland voted narrowly to stay in the United Kingdom. It is unsurprising then that Scotland’s prime minister has now floated the idea of holding a second referendum for Scottish Independence following Brexit as a way to keep the country within the EU. Scotland is also likely to suffer more economically than Britain as it relies on oil sales for a large portion of its economic output, which were already hampered by low prices.

Along with a potential second Scottish referendum, some even want Ireland to hold a vote to unify following Brexit, however, that idea was quickly shot down by the leader of Northern Ireland and seems much less likely. Even the tiny British territory of Gibraltar will be affected. Situated on the southern tip of Spain, Gibraltar faces the threat of greater Spanish incursion with Britain leaving the EU. The following video looks at the impact of Brexit on Northern Ireland and Scotland:

Impact on the United States

In the United States, the impact has been relatively subdued. While it remains to be determined how Brexit will affect the close relationship between the United States and Britain as well as the European Union at large, the economy was the first to feel the brunt of the decision. Following Brexit, U.S. stocks plunged for two straight days before rebounding and actually reaching record highs a few weeks later. Since then, the effects of Brexit in the United States have been portrayed as negligible with the Federal Reserve still planning on going ahead with at least one interest rate increase this year–something unlikely if the economy was believed to be in real financial danger. The accompanying video looks at some of the potential ramifications of Brexit for the US:

Conclusion

The United Kingdom never seemed to be fully committed to the European Union, and when the EU’s downsides started to outweigh its advantages in the eyes of British citizens, it was deemed time to leave. The impact of this decision has been swift with economic consequences spanning the world. But the true extent of the damage and even what leaving the EU will mean for the U.K. will still take years to sort out.

While much of the blame for this decision rests on British politicians, they are not solely at fault. The Brexit vote was the culmination of a much larger pattern across Europe and may even have parallels to the United States. In the U.K. politicians turned to advocating for nationalism and a refocusing of government policy inwards versus abroad. This was only further exacerbated by the mass migration crisis gripping the continent. This decision, however, was also the result of a union that is stuck in a proverbial purgatory, too united in some regards and not enough in others.

Lastly, the European Union may still face some challenges to the way in which it creates rules for member states–has the process become too top-down, with little bottom-up influence? Certainly in the case of the Brexit vote, citizens at the lowest level voted to topple the existing order and cast the futures of many parts of the world into question. While Britain’s exit may now be unavoidable, this is a good opportunity for pause both for the EU and the U.K., to consider how decisions are made and how to avoid future independence movements or bouts of fragmentation.

Resources

BBC News: The U.K.’s EU Referendum: All you need to know

European Futures: How Did We Get Here? A Brief History of Britain’s Membership of the EU

The Telegraph: Theresa May Pledges to Save the Union as Nicole Sturgeon Promises Scottish Referendum Vote to EU Nationals

The New York Times: ‘Brexit’: Explaining Britain’s Vote on European Union Membership

Law Street Media: Right-Wing Groups in Europe: A Rising Force?

The Economist: Straws in the Wind

NBC News: Brexit Fallout: Gibraltar Worries About Spain’s Next Move

The Financial Times: A tempest Tears Through British politics

The Week: What is Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty?

Bloomberg: Two More Fed Officials Play Down Brexit Impact on U.S. Growth

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Breaking Down Brexit: What the U.K.’s Decision Means for Itself and the World appeared first on Law Street.

Britain voted on Thursday to end its 43-year membership in the European Union. The withdrawal process will be long–it will most likely be two years until Britain is entirely sovereign–and fraught with difficult decisions for the nation’s future, but the vote has sent tremors within the now-former EU member-state and beyond. Here is a briefing on Brexit and what it might mean for the future:

From EU Member to “See EU Later”

This is not the first time Britain has held a vote on whether it should remain in the EU or not. In 1975, a similar referendum was held, but obviously, the country voted to remain in the bloc. British ill will toward the EU has permeated the country for decades, but the stage was set for Thursday’s vote in 2013 when Prime Minister David Cameron promised a Brexit referendum. With the promise, Cameron hoped to prove to an anti-European faction within his Conservative Party that most Britons disagreed with that sentiment.

This morning’s front page: See EU later! pic.twitter.com/ntv8ofV3Kv

— Sun Politics (@SunPolitics) June 24, 2016

In February of this year, at a summit with other European leaders in Brussels, Cameron announced the date when the referendum would be held. “Leave” supporters gained steam in the weeks that followed, and in April formed an official campaign, with the UK Independence Party as its informal leader. The spring was filled with division and discord, as many young people supported EU membership while older Britons grew disillusioned with its stifling bureaucracy.

A Fractured United Kingdom

The UK might be leaving the EU, but not all of the Kingdom’s countries support that move. Voter turnout was about 72 percent turnout throughout the entire UK, with 17.4 million people (or 52 percent of the total vote) on the Leave side and 16.1 million (48 percent) in the Remain camp. England saw the widest gap between those who favored Leave over Remain–53 percent to 47 percent respectively. Wales had similar figures, though its population is three million compared to England’s 53 million.

In fact, those were the only two regions of the UK that favored leaving the bloc. Scotland voted heavily in favor of the Remain side, with 62 percent of Scots wishing for the UK to stay an EU member-state. Northern Ireland and London saw similar percentages in favor of remaining. The fissures within the UK are significant, because there may be more Leave referendums to come, and most likely Scotland will vote for a second time whether or not to secede from Britain and become its own sovereign nation.

Britain’s Political Future

Soon after Thursday’s results were announced, David Cameron announced his resignation after six years in office. Many who are disappointed with the referendum’s result pin the blame on Cameron, who offered to bring the EU question to a referendum in the first place.

Speaking at 10 Downing Street, Cameron applauded the Leave campaign for a “spirited and passionate” effort and reiterated his view that the country would be better off as a part of the now 27-member bloc. He also said:

But the British people have made a very clear decision to take a different path, and as such I think the country requires fresh leadership to take it in this direction. I will do everything I can as prime minister to steady the ship over the coming weeks and months, but I do not think it would be right for me to try to be the captain that steers our country to its next destination.

So who will lead in his place? The next general election is scheduled for 2020, though that could be moved up due to Thursday’s shocking result. A leading candidate to succeed Cameron is Boris Johnson, the former mayor of London and a prominent voice in the Leave campaign. Home Secretary Theresa May and Chancellor George Osborne are other leading candidates.

Financial Instability

Irrespective of the potential long-term effects on the British economy, Brexit hit U.S. and global financial markets hard in the early morning hours on Friday. The British pound took a steep dive as well. As of 10:30 am Friday morning, the Dow Jones fell by 402 points, a 2.2 percent drop, and the Nasdaq dropped by 2.8 percent. In total, $450 billion of U.S. market value was erased on Friday morning. Tremors from Brexit were also felt in East Asian markets, as Japan’s Nikkei 225 index fell by more than seven percent and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index declined by 4.7 percent.

The British pound fell 10 percent, dropping its U.S. dollar exchange rate from $1.50 to $1.36. That is a 31-year low. The euro dropped by 3.8 percent as well. And the long-term consequences are just as bleak, according to most economists. Uncertainty might plague financial markets in at least the short-term future. Trade with Europe and the rest of the world could be hit hard, and travel will likely be restricted. John Van Reenen, director of the Center for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics, told the New York Times in May:

The pro-Brexit argument that Britain will be free of lots of regulations, that there will be a bonfire of red tape that will cause us to grow rapidly and we’ll strike lots of new trade deals as this buccaneering new England–there’s just no credible scenario to any of that.

America’s Response to Brexit

Predictably, American leaders weighed in during the hours that followed the Brexit results. Barack Obama said that America’s relationship with the UK will not change, nor will its commitment to the EU, which “has done so much to promote stability, stimulate economic growth, and foster the spread of democratic values and ideals across the continent and beyond,” he said. Vice President Joe Biden, who was in Ireland when the results came in, said the United States “fully respects” the decision, but “preferred a different outcome,” adding, “And our relationship with Ireland and the European Union will remain the cornerstone of our global engagement.”

Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, took to Twitter to voice his support for the UK and its “brave & brilliant vote:”

Just arrived in Scotland. Place is going wild over the vote. They took their country back, just like we will take America back. No games!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 24, 2016

Trump, whose movement in the United States has been compared to the Brexit Leave campaign, was in Turnery, Scotland to promote his new golf course. Hillary Clinton, the presumptive nominee on the Democrats’ side, used the result as an opportunity to reiterate the importance of a solid leader come November. “This time of uncertainty only underscores the need for calm, steady, experienced leadership in the White House to protect Americans’ pocketbooks and livelihoods, to support our friends and allies, to stand up to our adversaries, and to defend our interests,” she said in a statement.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Brexit: What You Need to Know in the Aftermath of Britain’s Historic Vote appeared first on Law Street.

Mayor of London Boris Johnson just announced that by the end of March 2016, the majority of Metropolitan Police officers will be supplied with 20,000 body cameras in an effort to help officers gather evidence to fight crime and boost public confidence. Metropolitan Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe said, “For too long our equipment has lagged behind the technology almost everyone has in their pockets to capture events as they unfold.” But while this now-international trend toward implementing body cams can help to uphold the law in theory, there are still concerns about whether this technology can really do its job in practice.

Mayor Boris Johnson confirms plans to roll out 20,000 police body cameras across the Met: https://t.co/JTlW1tKUpj pic.twitter.com/2W32Hznv4K

— MOPAC (@MOPACLdn) June 3, 2015

This development will make London the most body camera heavy city in the world, further advancing Britain’s status as one of the most surveilled states. The British Security Industry Authority (BSIA) estimates that there are up to 5.9 million closed-circuit television cameras in the country, or one camera for every eleven people in the United Kingdom.

For the past year, police officers in London have undergone trials of the body cameras and have reported positive results. The trial has allowed officers to generate about 6,000 video clips per month, which are uploaded daily and referenced when the footage is considered necessary for evidence. These trials, set to end later this summer, suggest that the implementation of body cameras can increase the number of guilty pleas and reduce complaints, speeding up the justice system. London police have come under scrutiny for controversial stop-and-search laws, which disproportionately target minority groups. London officials hope that body cameras will help to improve public trust and increase officer accountability in these scenarios.

While body cameras may be useful for monitoring daily operations of police officers, some civil rights groups are concerned that the technology will prove to be an intrusive surveillance tool that can be easily exploited. There is also concern about who has access to the footage and if it will be publicly accessible. The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime has plans to lead a citywide public engagement training to explain how the cameras work and when Londoners might encounter them. The London Policing Ethics Panel intends to produce the United Kingdom’s first report regarding the ethics of officers’ use of the cameras, which will be published in the fall.

Cities across the United States are also providing their officers with cameras. The company Taser, a maker of body cams, reported a 50 percent increase in sales in the first three months of 2015. While continued proliferation of body cameras seems forthcoming, critiques of the cameras’ use are also widespread. Most footage caught on camera is not considered public record, which has proved problematic–police departments can easily erase destructive footage. In some cases, officers forget to turn on their body or dashboard cameras, since neither device is constantly recording, but needs to be manually switched on. Some police officers’ cameras have conveniently malfunctioned at the time of an encounter, leaving victims of police brutality without evidence of their claims. Had the Ferguson, Missouri police department mandated the use of police officer body cameras or used dashboard cameras in patrol cars, the mystery surrounding what truly happened leading up to and during the fatal Michael Brown shooting of 2014 would have been absolved.

Necessary changes must be made to officer accountability in the wake of years of unrest. London is taking a huge step forward in what may become a revolution in police liability and encouraging a positive shift in public discourse about law enforcement. Video clips should be accessible by the public. Police officers should be held individually accountable for the use of their cameras, by disciplining those who routinely forget to turn on their body cams. Police departments, prosecutors, and every other chain of command throughout the justice system should work toward preserving footage to protect the rights of the abused, even if—and especially when—police officers are in the wrong. While implementation of body cameras is the first move going forward–and London should be applauded for its efforts–effective, ethical execution of their use is the most important step.

Emily Dalgo

Emily Dalgo is a member of the American University Class of 2017 and a Law Street Media Fellow during the Summer of 2015. Contact Emily at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post London Moves Forward with Police Body Cams: Will the U.S. Follow? appeared first on Law Street.