Rebuilding bridges: Trump, Ukraine war are drawing Britain and the EU closer

BRUSSELS – Five years after the United Kingdom formally severed its political and trade links with the European Union, the two seek to heal their deep rift.

Dr Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the EU’s executive body, has just returned from a visit to London, claiming that her talks with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer had proven that the EU and the UK “are ready to face global challenges as like-minded partners”.

Ambassadors from the EU’s 27 member states convened on April 30 in Brussels to review a newly circulated British proposal that will commit the Union and the UK to further strengthen their relationship, particularly in their shared support for the principles of free trade and Ukraine’s continued resistance to

the Russian invasion.

None of these moves will erase the main consequences of Britain’s departure from the EU: Border controls restricting the free movement of people will remain in place, and some trade difficulties will persist.

But there is no question that political engagement across the Channel between the UK and the EU has never been closer since Brexit, and the two are poised to cement their relationship even further at a summit scheduled to take place in London on May 19.

Nor is there much doubt about the immediate impetus for this trend: the shock throughout Europe about US President Donald Trump’s policies, which threaten to upend the continent’s security and economic arrangements.

Britain severed its formal links with the EU on Jan 31, 2020, on bad terms. Many key economic arrangements remained unaddressed. And there was anger on both sides.

British negotiators resented the alleged pettiness of their EU counterparts. And EU officials complained that the Brits did not know what they wanted.

It did not help that this was the first time the EU had to deal with such a separation process, so rules were being created as the negotiations proceeded.

And political calculations also got in the way.

The Conservative Party that ruled Britain at that time claimed that Brexit would be a huge economic success, so British negotiators were under pressure to show that they “triumphed” in their confrontation with Brussels.

Meanwhile, EU negotiators feared that Britain’s departure might encourage other member states to follow suit, so they were determined to prove that leaving the Union carried real costs and that Britain could not continue to enjoy unfettered access to European markets without abiding by EU rules, laws and regulations.

Tensions and bad blood between the two were not merely inevitable but built into their negotiations from the start.

Few of these problems exist today. Britain’s ruling Labour Party considers Brexit a mistake. Mr Starmer has ruled out a debate about Britain’s return to the EU fold, but has no problem admitting that the British economy has suffered due to Brexit.

Meanwhile, nobody in the EU now fears that concessions to Britain could encourage others to leave the Union; the British experience was so excruciatingly complicated and painful that no existing member state would be tempted to repeat it. So, Brussels has much more room for manoeuvre.

And then, there is Mr Trump.

The EU fears he will try to play off Britain against the Union by offering the Brits better trading terms.

And the British, who until now have largely escaped Mr Trump’s wrath – partly because Mr Starmer has cordial relations with the US leader and partly because Britain’s trade with the US is roughly balanced – fear that the EU could leverage its much larger trading muscle to extract concessions from the Americans at the expense of Britain’s trade position.

Yet, the biggest worry is Europe’s defence and security arrangements.

Next to those of France, Britain’s armed forces are considered the most capable in Europe. Like the French, the British are also a nuclear power and a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

As the three-year-long war in Ukraine has proven, no durable European security relationship is feasible without British participation. And as Mr Trump threatens to reduce American force contributions to Europe, Britain’s military capabilities are even more significant.

The UK and EU now plan to use the May 19 London summit as the occasion for the inking of a broader new defence deal, which will open the door to British arms firms reaping bigger potential rewards from a €150 billion (S$222.8 billion) EU fund for European rearmament.

There could also be an agreement on eliminating restrictions on trade in agricultural products – until now a sensitive topic for both sides.

And although immigration controls will remain in place, they could be lifted for Europeans under 30, who may be offered a special youth mobility scheme, allowing them to travel, study and work for short periods in Britain.

Plenty of obstacles remain.

France insists that its fishermen should be granted access to British waters, something London refuses to consider.

And there is stiff opposition in Britain to simplifying agricultural trade with Europe because that would entail accepting the EU’s stricter food standards, and effectively lock out many US food imports.

“If we are going to align with the EU on food standards and veterinary standards, then we’re going to make life for America very difficult, maybe impossible,” warned Mr Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform, an anti-EU protest movement predicted to do well in Britain’s May 1 local elections.

But fear of a trade war with the US and apprehensions about Mr Trump’s willingness to sacrifice Ukraine as part of an eventual American deal with Russia are now drawing the UK and EU together.

“We are friends. And we are Europeans,” Dr von der Leyen said after her latest visit to London. “It means that we share interests and democratic values. And that we are ready to face global challenges as like-minded partners.”