Brexit would not benefit US in long run

TEHRAN, Jul. 04 (MNA) – A University of South Alabama professor believes Britain’s referendum was a political gamble by Prime Minister Cameron to consolidate his party’s position inside Britain and the EU.

Payman Yazdani of Mehr News International Service asked Professor Nader Entessar of University of South Alabama about the Brexit, impacts on the US, and the post-Second World War independent states. The US would prefer a divided EU since it possibly would easily won the latter’s agreement in international issues where the EU would show a degree of independence when it was united and coordinated, Professor Entessar believed. However, the long term impacts of the Brexit on the US would be not beneficial:

Considering the grave consequences of Brexit, why did Britain decided to hold referendum on the issue?

Several months ago, Prime Minster David Cameron decided to call for a popular referendum on the future of Great Britain and its ties to the European Union (EU). Cameron thought that by calling this referendum he could strengthen his party's position both in the UK and vis-a-vis the European Union and get more concessions from the EU.  Obviously, this was a major political gamble because Cameron never imagined that the referendum would result in the victory for the opponents of the British membership in the EU. 

Are consequences short term ones or they will last long?

Assuming that the Brexit will hold and Great Britain will indeed leave the EU entirely, the consequences for the British will be long-lasting. 

Is Brexit positive for the US in long term or not? Some believe contrary to US' declared stance on Brexit (not supporting it), in long term it will be to the benefit of US. What do you think of this?

I think Brexit will not benefit US political and economic interests in Europe in the long-run.  In many recent international issues (including the Iran nuclear deal), the US was able to get its way by claiming that its interests coincided with those of the "international community."  If the international community (i.e. Europe) is fractured, it may be difficult for the US to sell its own agenda as that of the international community.  On the other hand, the US may find it easier to pressure a weaker and divided Europe.  But, on the whole, the negative aspects of Brexit will outweigh the positive ones for the United States.

Some say the regimes made after Second World War does not function well. Do you think so?

The immediate post-World War II international regime was set up to respond to the needs of a different era and the emerging Cold War conflicts. That era is over now. With respect to the issue of European integration, the EU has been largely successful notwithstanding its recent difficulties. I think one of the major errors on the part of the EU was to push for enlargement at a fast rate following the end of the Cold War.  Many of the recent EU members have been relatively weak economically and politically. As a result, they have drained EU's resources. Regional integration is most successful when the member states have similar levels of economic development and share compatible sociopolitical outlooks.

Nader Entessar is Professor and Chair of the Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice at the University of South Alabama. He is the author of more than 70 articles and book chapters in scholarly publications and has published six books. Dr. Entessar’s latest publications are 'Kurdish Politics in the Middle East' and 'Iran’s Northern Exposure: Foreign Policy Challenges in Eurasia.'

Interview by: Payman Yazdani

News Code 117788


Your Comment

You are replying to: .
  • captcha