This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/world/europe/uk-brexit-theresa-may.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
‘Brexit’ Ruling Could Cause Britain to Drag Its Feet, Muddying E.U. Plans ‘Brexit’ Ruling Could Cause Britain to Drag Its Feet, Muddying E.U. Plans
(about 2 hours later)
LONDON — Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain faced a complex new reality on Friday. Not only had a ruling by Britain’s High Court imperiled her “Brexit” strategy, but she also had to contend with leaders from the Continent who had once begged the British to stay in the European Union but who were now saying they wanted them out, and fast. LONDON — European Union officials, feeling exasperated on Friday by the court ruling that imperiled Prime Minister Theresa May’s strategy to exit the bloc, have gone from pleading with Britain to stay to wanting it out fast.
The court ruling that she must gain Parliament’s approval to begin the process of withdrawal from the European Union or Brexit — raised the possibility that negotiations could drag on far past Mrs. May’s deadline of the end of March. The ruling by Britain’s High Court that she must gain Parliament’s approval to begin the process of withdrawal from the European Union, or Brexit — raised the possibility that negotiations could drag on far past Mrs. May’s deadline of the end of March.
But that poses problems not only for the British prime minister but also for the political establishment on the Continent, where among other things France and Germany are heading toward important elections, with populist parties gaining strength. That poses problems not only for the British prime minister but also for the political establishment on the Continent, where, among other things, France and Germany are heading toward important elections, with populist parties gaining strength.
The High Court ruling also is a reminder of the fragility of the European Union, which seemingly is buffeted by an existential threat every other week. Last week, it was Wallonia’s nearly killing a trade deal with Canada. Next month, it is a constitutional referendum in Italy.The High Court ruling also is a reminder of the fragility of the European Union, which seemingly is buffeted by an existential threat every other week. Last week, it was Wallonia’s nearly killing a trade deal with Canada. Next month, it is a constitutional referendum in Italy.
The European Union was already struggling with a witches’ brew of problems: low economic growth; high joblessness; uncertainty in the eurozone, with Greece again in economic difficulties and questions about the soundness of Italian banks; a crackdown in Turkey; and an aggressive Russia. Immigration from the Middle East, North Africa and Afghanistan, seemingly under control earlier this year, is on the rise once again.The European Union was already struggling with a witches’ brew of problems: low economic growth; high joblessness; uncertainty in the eurozone, with Greece again in economic difficulties and questions about the soundness of Italian banks; a crackdown in Turkey; and an aggressive Russia. Immigration from the Middle East, North Africa and Afghanistan, seemingly under control earlier this year, is on the rise once again.
Looming over all of this are the growing populist, nationalist and far-right movements in core European Union countries like France, Germany and the Netherlands, not to speak of newer members like Hungary and Poland.Looming over all of this are the growing populist, nationalist and far-right movements in core European Union countries like France, Germany and the Netherlands, not to speak of newer members like Hungary and Poland.
Nor has faith in the European Union been helped by recent embarrassments, like the hangup on the trade deal with Canada. That led Peter Ziga, the Slovak economy minister, to wonder, “If we don’t agree with Canada, with whom will we agree?”Nor has faith in the European Union been helped by recent embarrassments, like the hangup on the trade deal with Canada. That led Peter Ziga, the Slovak economy minister, to wonder, “If we don’t agree with Canada, with whom will we agree?”
Cecilia Malmstrom, the bloc’s trade commissioner, went further, saying with a smile, “If we can’t make it with Canada, I’m not sure we can make it with the U.K.”Cecilia Malmstrom, the bloc’s trade commissioner, went further, saying with a smile, “If we can’t make it with Canada, I’m not sure we can make it with the U.K.”
The European Union found a way to buy off the Walloons, a tactic it often relies on when under great pressure. But few think lurching from crisis to crisis without addressing fundamental problems is any way to manage an alliance of 28 nations that share important aspects of sovereignty including, for 19 of them, a single currency.The European Union found a way to buy off the Walloons, a tactic it often relies on when under great pressure. But few think lurching from crisis to crisis without addressing fundamental problems is any way to manage an alliance of 28 nations that share important aspects of sovereignty including, for 19 of them, a single currency.
And then there is the vexed, complicated problem of Britain and its exit after more than 40 years, which few European countries either expected or wanted. Like the guest at a party who overstays his welcome, Britain and its internal psychodrama are getting on the nerves of its European partners, who fear further economic and political uncertainty to add to the already unhappy mix.And then there is the vexed, complicated problem of Britain and its exit after more than 40 years, which few European countries either expected or wanted. Like the guest at a party who overstays his welcome, Britain and its internal psychodrama are getting on the nerves of its European partners, who fear further economic and political uncertainty to add to the already unhappy mix.
The British government and the ruling Conservative Party are deeply divided about what kind of relationship they want with the European Union, apparently having forgotten that the other 27 nations must unanimously agree to any new deal, and what Britain wants is not entirely the point.The British government and the ruling Conservative Party are deeply divided about what kind of relationship they want with the European Union, apparently having forgotten that the other 27 nations must unanimously agree to any new deal, and what Britain wants is not entirely the point.
The frustration for Brussels is that it cannot force Britain to act. It has to wait for the government to trigger Article 50, which begins a two-year negotiating period for exit. While many European leaders had wanted Article 50 to be invoked immediately after Britons voted to leave on June 23, they agreed to the March timetable.The frustration for Brussels is that it cannot force Britain to act. It has to wait for the government to trigger Article 50, which begins a two-year negotiating period for exit. While many European leaders had wanted Article 50 to be invoked immediately after Britons voted to leave on June 23, they agreed to the March timetable.
That remains Mrs. May’s stated goal. But the High Court decision — which the government is appealing to the Supreme Court — has created the potential for months more delay, as well as the prospect that Parliament might lay down negotiating parameters that could make the talks even more difficult.That remains Mrs. May’s stated goal. But the High Court decision — which the government is appealing to the Supreme Court — has created the potential for months more delay, as well as the prospect that Parliament might lay down negotiating parameters that could make the talks even more difficult.
Mrs. May’s few public statements imply that she is leaning toward a “hard Brexit,” emphasizing control over immigration and Britain’s borders, even if that forces the country to leave Europe’s single market and hurts the economy. But the pro-European forces who make up a majority in Parliament, emboldened by the court ruling, may now have the means to soften her stance enough to keep Britain in the single market.Mrs. May’s few public statements imply that she is leaning toward a “hard Brexit,” emphasizing control over immigration and Britain’s borders, even if that forces the country to leave Europe’s single market and hurts the economy. But the pro-European forces who make up a majority in Parliament, emboldened by the court ruling, may now have the means to soften her stance enough to keep Britain in the single market.
That would mean compromising on immigration, which is anathema to hard-line supporters of Brexit in her party and right-wing nationalists. The haggling could go on for some time.That would mean compromising on immigration, which is anathema to hard-line supporters of Brexit in her party and right-wing nationalists. The haggling could go on for some time.
On Friday, in telephone calls with Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, Mrs. May said she was confident she would meet the March deadline and that the government would win in the Supreme Court, which will hear the case in early December.On Friday, in telephone calls with Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, Mrs. May said she was confident she would meet the March deadline and that the government would win in the Supreme Court, which will hear the case in early December.
But not everyone is so sure, and the timing matters. The bloc’s leaders want Britain out before elections for the European Parliament, scheduled for 2019, and to allow for planning a new European Union budget. Mrs. May’s original timetable works for that, but it is no longer certain she can deliver on her promises. And no one really knows how to handle, or budget for, a Britain that is not yet out but does not want to be in.But not everyone is so sure, and the timing matters. The bloc’s leaders want Britain out before elections for the European Parliament, scheduled for 2019, and to allow for planning a new European Union budget. Mrs. May’s original timetable works for that, but it is no longer certain she can deliver on her promises. And no one really knows how to handle, or budget for, a Britain that is not yet out but does not want to be in.
In Berlin on Friday, the German foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, told his British counterpart, Boris Johnson, “Dragging things out won’t serve anyone.”In Berlin on Friday, the German foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, told his British counterpart, Boris Johnson, “Dragging things out won’t serve anyone.”
He warned Britain against expecting special treatment and urged for negotiations to start as soon as possible.He warned Britain against expecting special treatment and urged for negotiations to start as soon as possible.
“Two years sounds at first like a lot of time,” he said, “but if you look at the complexity, two years is comparatively short.”“Two years sounds at first like a lot of time,” he said, “but if you look at the complexity, two years is comparatively short.”
Mr. Johnson, who backed Brexit, said that Britain would leave the bloc but remain a part of Europe. But the future balance of the relationship remains extremely unclear.Mr. Johnson, who backed Brexit, said that Britain would leave the bloc but remain a part of Europe. But the future balance of the relationship remains extremely unclear.
As a measure of Britain’s febrile political mood, the largely right-wing British press, which mostly supports Mrs. May, attacked the three High Court judges for being “out of touch” and seeking to undermine the popular referendum in favor of Brexit. One paper, the popular and often rabid Daily Mail, had a huge headline under photographs of the judges, reading, “Enemies of the People.”As a measure of Britain’s febrile political mood, the largely right-wing British press, which mostly supports Mrs. May, attacked the three High Court judges for being “out of touch” and seeking to undermine the popular referendum in favor of Brexit. One paper, the popular and often rabid Daily Mail, had a huge headline under photographs of the judges, reading, “Enemies of the People.”
Even the more staid Daily Telegraph headlined its front page: “The judges versus the people.” With that was a front-page column by Nigel Farage, the leader of the pro-Brexit U.K. Independence Party, saying that the court ruling means that “a great betrayal is underway.”Even the more staid Daily Telegraph headlined its front page: “The judges versus the people.” With that was a front-page column by Nigel Farage, the leader of the pro-Brexit U.K. Independence Party, saying that the court ruling means that “a great betrayal is underway.”
Even though Mr. Farage and the “Leave” camp won the referendum handily, 52 percent to 48 percent, many, like him, are obsessed with the idea that Mrs. May is feigning support for Brexit and that the government, Parliament, the judges and “the elite” will betray the more than 17 million voters who wanted out of the European Union.Even though Mr. Farage and the “Leave” camp won the referendum handily, 52 percent to 48 percent, many, like him, are obsessed with the idea that Mrs. May is feigning support for Brexit and that the government, Parliament, the judges and “the elite” will betray the more than 17 million voters who wanted out of the European Union.
It is an obvious irony that one prime reason they had for supporting Brexit was to restore the full sovereignty of Parliament, a stance taken by the judges, too, but inconveniently now, because it might slow down Britain’s exit.It is an obvious irony that one prime reason they had for supporting Brexit was to restore the full sovereignty of Parliament, a stance taken by the judges, too, but inconveniently now, because it might slow down Britain’s exit.
Mrs. May also faced criticism from another front on Friday, when a Conservative member of Parliament, Stephen Phillips, who supported Brexit but has accused her government of trying to sideline Parliament, resigned his seat.Mrs. May also faced criticism from another front on Friday, when a Conservative member of Parliament, Stephen Phillips, who supported Brexit but has accused her government of trying to sideline Parliament, resigned his seat.
Last month, he crystallized his objections in an opinion article in The Guardian in which he said that “not giving Parliament the chance, before Article 50 is invoked, to say where it thinks these negotiations should end up is, at its core, undemocratic, unconstitutional and likely to exacerbate the divisions in our society to which the referendum gave rise.”Last month, he crystallized his objections in an opinion article in The Guardian in which he said that “not giving Parliament the chance, before Article 50 is invoked, to say where it thinks these negotiations should end up is, at its core, undemocratic, unconstitutional and likely to exacerbate the divisions in our society to which the referendum gave rise.”
With a small majority in Parliament, Mrs. May is being urged by some, including The Times of London, to call an early election to win her own mandate and increase her majority at a time when the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties are weak.With a small majority in Parliament, Mrs. May is being urged by some, including The Times of London, to call an early election to win her own mandate and increase her majority at a time when the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties are weak.
She has vowed not to have an election before its scheduled date of 2020, but if Parliament creates too many difficulties and delays for her, she may have no choice.She has vowed not to have an election before its scheduled date of 2020, but if Parliament creates too many difficulties and delays for her, she may have no choice.