Looking at the last two centuries, certain patterns emerge. Firstly, the second decade of each century has thrown up a major event that has set the scene for the rest of that century, secondly, the issue is always about the governance of Europe and thirdly, the English have always come well out of it.
As the 1800s began, Napoleon was building his Grand Plan of a European Empire. By the beginning of the second decade he had unified Europe except for Russia and England. Then, defeated first in Russia in 1812 and then at Waterloo in 1814, that project of a united Europe went up in smoke while victorious England spent the remainder of the century building the British “empire on which the sun never set”.
A history of second decade events
As the 1900s began, the cost and effort of empire saw England vulnerable and feeling threatened by the scientific, industrial and economic advancement of Germany. Again, the second decade, 1914 to 1918, saw England facing Germany for the control of Europe. This time, though, the outcome was not as clear as at Waterloo. With both sides bogged down in entrenched stalemate, the late entry of the US was crucial and England was forced to share victory and spoils with the US, who went on to build their own world order for the remainder of the century.
As the 2000s began, things again seemed to be on course for a single economic and political European superstate under the EU, but England again stood against. First by staying out of the euro and then by developing its “special relationship” with US for the invasion of Iraq in 2003, England made it clear that it was determined to stand against all efforts towards development of a European superstate. Last week, it all came to a head in the Brexit vote.
I believe England is too proud of its place and history to crawl back and have a second referendum. Therefore, I believe the die is cast
A political mistake or a logical step?
So, was the Brexit vote an aberration, a huge political mistake, a Tory insider plot gone wrong? Or was it a logical next step in a developing pattern? Will it be seen as the turning point that sets the direction for the remainder of the century? Maybe! But what is that direction?
Given the history, I think it would be very unwise to write England out of the game. I believe England is too proud of its place and history to crawl back and have a second referendum. Therefore, I believe the die is cast. Directions are being faced and things will develop as they must.
Just two things seem certain to me. Firstly, the drive to develop a single European Super state are again “off the rails”. Secondly, soccer aside, it would be very foolish to write off London and England continuing to be significant world players for the rest of the century.
Where it leaves us
From an Irish farming perspective, all this highlights just how uncertain is the future and how important it is to build maximum resilience into all our farm plans until such a time as we can see new patterns emerging.
England’s big population still needs food and it would be nice if Ireland and Scotland can, within the EU, form a Celtic block to provide that food. We must retain our competitive position in both the English and EU market.
In a sense, England doesn’t really need Europe and Europe doesn’t really need England, and England needs us more than the EU does. However, we need them both, and keeping both sides open will require very strong statesmanship from Ireland and Scotland in times ahead.