Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Great Britain and Differentiated Integration in Europe

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Brexit

Abstract

The United Kingdom has always been a special case in the European integration project. The British exceptionalism manifested in various forms and ways over the history. June 23rd 2016 delivered another culmination point in the story of the stubborn European’s relations with its continental partners. The so-called Brexit referendum, which brought about victory for the supporters of the UK leaving the European Union, marks an important milestone in these relations. It has never been an easy marriage and many times threatened by the divorce. Instead of becoming ever closer, the European Union becomes ever loser and the UK is ever closer to leaving. Brexit is not only vital for the British, it is potentially destructive for the EU from the core. The UK changes its status inside from an integration-tolerant country (not a very ambitious one anyway), to integration unfriendly country, which endangers the very fundaments of the integration process. It produces externalities to be consumed by other Member States and non-members as well.

Accordingly, the main purpose of this chapter is to shed light on the positive discrimination of the UK inside the EU and its entertaining the status of a preferential membership. The referendum is seen as a game in which London tried to win even more beneficial conditions inside the EU and now, after the referendum, will try to build a status of a preferential non-membership. From this perspective, this process can be seen as an exercise in searching the limits of differentiated integration. The problem has always been there, the Brexit referendum made it crystal clear. It may serve as a wakeup call for the necessary reforms of the EU.

Based on the analysis of the existing literature about the differentiated integration, this contribution sees the June 2016 Brexit referendum as a structural problem for the EU. Following the logic of the integration evolution from one crisis to another one, it is possible to interpret the Brexit decision as an opportunity for the EU’s reforms. The reformist impulse of Brexit may enhance the European integration in two various possible ways. First, it may help to reform the EU into a more differentiated system that will allow accommodate countries willing to integrate at various speeds and extends. Secondly, once “getting rid” of the major troublemaker and marauder, that is Britain as a country opposing the further integration, the EU may accelerate now towards the “ever closer union”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Further see: Andersen and Sitter (2006).

  2. 2.

    For details see Schimmelfennig (2014).

  3. 3.

    See also Leruth (2015).

  4. 4.

    Compare with Andersen and Sitter (2006) and Mohler and Seitz (2012).

  5. 5.

    For more details see Leruth and Lord (2015).

  6. 6.

    See also Genschel and Jachtenfuchs (2014).

  7. 7.

    See further Leuffen et al. (2013) and Schimmelfennig (2014).

  8. 8.

    See also Jensen and Slapin (2012), De Neve (2007), Zielonka (2007) and Kölliker (2001).

  9. 9.

    Leruth and Lord (2015).

  10. 10.

    See further Lemke (2014).

  11. 11.

    For details see Fossum (2015).

  12. 12.

    Compare with Leruth and Lord (2015).

  13. 13.

    For an illustration of this approach see Szwarc (2015) and Zhelyankova (2014).

  14. 14.

    For example, see Winzen and Schimmelfennig (2015).

  15. 15.

    For an exemplification go to Leruth (2015).

  16. 16.

    See also Dyson and Sepos (2010).

  17. 17.

    For details see Schimmelfennig et al. (2015).

  18. 18.

    Compare with Kenny and Pearse (2016).

  19. 19.

    For details see Leruth and Lord (2015).

  20. 20.

    Glencross (2015), p. 306.

  21. 21.

    For details see Oliver (2015).

  22. 22.

    Also see Daddow (2015).

  23. 23.

    Fontana and Parsons (2015), p. 89.

  24. 24.

    Also see Kenny and Pearse (2016).

  25. 25.

    Compare with Hodgson (2016).

  26. 26.

    Hilton (2016).

  27. 27.

    Also see Haralambous (2016).

  28. 28.

    The potential success of separatisms like Scotish or Irish may stimulate the separatist movements in other parts of Europe, including the Basqes or Cathalans in Spain, Waloons or Flanders in the Netherlands or Silesians in Poland.

  29. 29.

    Also see Qvartrup (2016).

  30. 30.

    Further see Schimmelfennig (2014).

  31. 31.

    Also see Schimmelfennig and Winzen (2014).

  32. 32.

    Compare with Allemand (2005) and Schweiger and Magone (2014).

  33. 33.

    Directly after the Brexit referendum, in several EU Member States (Slovakia for example) some political forces started to collect citizens’ signatures for the initiative to organize an EU-exit referendum.

  34. 34.

    Compare with Oliver (2015).

  35. 35.

    Also see Bernstein (2016).

  36. 36.

    Schimmelfennig et al. (2015).

References

  • Allemand F (2005) The impact of the EU enlargement on economic and Monetary Union: what lessons can be learnt from the differentiated integration mechanisms in an enlarged Europe? Eur Law J 11(5):586–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen SS, Sitter N (2006) Differentiated integration: what is it and how much can the EU accomodate? Eur Integr 28(4):313–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein A (2016) To brexit or to brexit?, “News Extra” April 2016, p 7

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron D (2016) The future of the EU and the UK’s relationship with it, London, 23 Jan 2013, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/eu-speech-at-bloomberg. Accessed 20 June 2016

  • Daddow O (2015) Interpreting the outsider tradition in British European policy speeches from Thatcher to Cameron. J Common Mark Stud 53(1):71–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Neve J-E (2007) The European onion? How differentiated integration is reshaping the EU. Eur Integr 29(4):503–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyson K, Sepos A (2010) Differentiation as design principle and as tool in the political management of European integration. In: Dyson K, Sepos A (eds) Which Europe? The politics of differentiated integration. Palgrave, Basingstoke, pp 3–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontana G, Parsons C (2015) ‘One woman’s prejudice’: did Margaret Thatcher cause Britains’ anti-Europeanis? J Common Mark Stud 53(1):89–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fossum JE (2015) Democracy and differentiation in Europe. J Eur Publ Policy 22(6):799–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genschel P, Jachtenfuchs M (2014) Introduction: beyond market regulation. Analysing the European integration of core state powers. In: Genschel P, Jachtenfuchs M (eds) Beyond the regulatory polity? The European integration of core state powers. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Glencross A (2015) Why a British referendum on EU membership will not solve the Europe question. Int Aff 91(2):303–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haralambous D (2016) The cost of Brexit, financialdirector.co.uk, http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=d2e58bc6-cfa2-47a9-ad49-69ac1e1347e2%40sessionmgr4005&vid=0&hid=4112 (05.05.2016)

  • Hilton A (2016) Statement in: “The London Evening Standard” 25 February 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson P (2016) Complying with Brexit, “Complience Week” May 2016, pp 53–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen D, Slapin J (2012) Institutional hokey-pokey: the politics of multispeed integration in the European Union. J Eur Publ Policy 19(6):779–795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny M, Pearse N (2016) After Brexit. The Eurosceptic dream of an Anglosphere. Juncture 22(4):304–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kölliker A (2001) Bringing together or driving apart the union? Towards a theory of differentiated integration. West Eur Polit 24(4):125–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemke C (2014) Challenging the “ever closer union”: political consequences of the Eurozone crisis. Am Foreign Policy Interests 36:18–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leruth B (2015) Operationalizing national preferences on Europe and differentiated integration. J Eur Publ Policy 22(6):816–835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leruth B, Lord C (2015) Differentiated integration in the European Union: a concept, a process, a system or a theory? J Eur Publ Policy 22(6):754–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leuffen D, Rittberger B, Schimmelfennig F (2013) Differentiated integration. Explaining variation in the European Union. Palgrave, Basingstoke

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mohler L, Seitz M (2012) The gains from variety in the European Union. Rev World Econ 148:475–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver T (2015) To be or not to be in Europe: is that the question? Britains’ European question and an in/out referendum. Int Aff 91(1):77–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qvartrup M (2016) Referendums on membership and European integration. Polit Q 87(1):61–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelfennig F (2014) EU enlargement and differentiated integration: discrimination or equal treatment? J Eur Publ Policy 21(5):681–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelfennig F, Winzen T (2014) Instrumental and constitutional differentiation in the European Union. J Common Mark Stud 52(2):354–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelfennig F, Leufen D, Rittberger B (2015) The European Union as a system of differentiated integration: interdependence, politicisation, differentiation. J Eur Publ Policy 22(6):764–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schweiger C, Magone J (2014) Differentiated integration and cleavage under crisis conditions. Perspect Eur Polit Soc 15(3):259–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szwarc M (2015) Zróżnicowana integracja i wzmocniona współpraca w prawie Unii Europejskiej, Warszawa 2005

    Google Scholar 

  • Winzen T, Schimmelfennig F (2015) The choice for differentiated Europe; Why European Union member states opt out of integration. Paper prepared for the 14th biennial conference of the European Union Studies Association, 5–7 March 2015, Boston MA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhelyankova A (2014) From selective integration into selective implementation: the link between differentiated integration and conformity with EU laws. Eur J Polit Res 53:727–746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zielonka J (2007) Europa jako imperium. Nowe spojrzenie na Unię Europejską. PISM, Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Political Science, Opole University, Opole, Poland

    Rafał Riedel

Authors
  1. Rafał Riedel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Tallinn Law School, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia

    David Ramiro Troitiño

  2. Tallinn Law School, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia

    Tanel Kerikmäe

  3. Tallinn Law School, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia

    Archil Chochia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Riedel, R. (2018). Great Britain and Differentiated Integration in Europe. In: Ramiro Troitiño, D., Kerikmäe, T., Chochia, A. (eds) Brexit. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73414-9_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73414-9_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73413-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73414-9

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation