Brexit is a divorce for a new marriage
Political scientists could not give an obvious explanation of the decision of England to leave the European Union, because they do not understand what is going on in the modern West. It is clear that it is falling apart because of debts and problems, but what does it have to do with Brexit, they do not understand. So they decided that this decision demonstrates the inadequacy of Britons. After all, during the crisis it is needed to unite the forces — to overcome it with help of common efforts. Whereas the “every man for himself” model is efficient only in favorable conditions. For example, “slicing of a pie.”
Like all nations, Britons often make mistakes. Otherwise, they would not be a great nation nowadays. But there is no reason to consider Britons inadequate. They certainly are not one of flighty nations like the Poles. And they are not one of irresponsible nations like the Greeks. The heart of the English nation is the City of London — the “golden mile”. As for the intellect of the nation, it is inhibited by the loss of the status of a great empire. Consequently, England is not satisfied with the role of “fifth wheel” of the EU. It is likely, it joined the European Union on the initiative of America, which needed to have there, as a minimum, “eyes and ears”, as a maximum, agent of influence. So if England decided to leave the EU, it means that more attractive prospect was offered. And this is the prospect of the US interest.
The events looking radical and having large-scale consequences do not just happen like that. In this sense, the explanation of Brexit as a result of the mood swings of the English men, is extremely doubtful. After all, to organize such a change very strong interest of very large part of influential people is required. Therefore, most likely England has decided to leave the EU not on its own — it was needed for the United States. That is, to make England appear in a different place and with a different status on the world stage. And this is not a place in the backyard of the EU in the role of European separatist.
And that is not all. Global crisis is developing in the European Union. But Brexit significantly limits the opportunities of the United States to participate in these processes with the help of England — to influence them. This means that the European Union has ceased to be America’s interest. A refusal of Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreement which was almost ready to sign, shows that there is a radical change in US economic policy. D. Trump already says it clearly. And in the new policy, there is a new place and a new status for England.
It seems the most likely, the United States removed England from the EU to solve the problem of unstoppable decline of its “weight” in the world economy. In the long term continuation of this process will change the status of the US in the global market from the “main” party to “one of the most influential.” And the first rule of management states that it is needed to turn the negative processes to the opposite direction. US interest in the reversal process of changing its “weight” in the world economy from decline to growth definitely exits. And the problem is complicated by the tenth year of the global economic crisis and the burden of the fundamental problems of the American economy.
And how to increase the “weight” quickly? For example, in a year? The easiest way is to follow the steps of the EU — to organize own economic union. But not in the form of the European Bazaar, but much more homogeneous — in fact, combining the Anglo-Saxon world. That is, the United States, England, Canada, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand. In this case, it is easy to understand why the first thing Trump did was canceling of already concluded Asia-Pacific Trade Agreement. US requires a high-grade Union — Economic Federation of “relatives” in which America will be the “head of the family.” And it needs not the partners, but relatives in the status of trusted employees. There is a draft of such a union there — it is needed just to revive the British Commonwealth, adding to its statute some points necessary for the United States. As a result, “weight” of the United States will be much higher than the “weight” of the European Union.
Perhaps, in this case a big role is played by the very real prospect of the collapse of the dollar system. Although pound system is not comparable to the dollar system in scale , however, is able to play the role of financial “crutch” in case of realization of negative scenarios for the dollar in case of the global financial crisis for America. And while Wall Street will be lying in ruins, the City of London will be able to carry out its role for the US. And for England, it is a possibility to significantly improve its status — to become the “right hand” of the US. At this point, “Brexit” becomes completely understandable event — it has a very powerful customer and understandable interest of the performer. But that’s not the whole story.
There is a simple way to get the “weight” absolutely unattainable for competition. Namely — to initiate the split of the EU into two parts- north, led by Germany and south, led by France. In addition to a significantly lower weight category of each, such union split will reduce the size of the euro system by half, that can be critically important for the negative prospects for the dollar — it will limit the opportunities for the euro to take advantage of the situation and seize the status of the world’s main reserve currency.
And this split will be completely natural — different economic situation in the northern and southern EU countries demonstrates the presence of significantly different economic management systems. Moreover, at the conceptual level. Talks about the “Europe with different speeds” reflect the understanding that the European Union is too patchy to act as a single entity in case of global crisis. In fact, these conversations show the preparation of public opinion for the need to separate the EU into much more homogeneous unions.
This option is quite good for France. As in this case, it changes the status of junior partner of Germany to the status of the leader of the independent union. So it is not an accident that Marine Le Pen has had much higher results in the last election in comparison with the previous ones. Consequently, she obtained substantially bigger support of the ruling class. At the same time, she had seemed to have the most uncompetitive slogan — “we need to start to live differently.” But this can be done only in one way — to radically change the EU. And what is the easiest way to change it in the favour of France? Split the EU into two unions, one of which it will lead. And, of course, it will be the Union where members which are closer to France will be united — Southern countries.
In the EU a separation on the line “North-South” is real, and it is only getting deeper. Therefore, the EU split on the Northern Union, led by Germany and the South, led by France is a purely technical question. It is quite feasible for the United States. By the way, Fronde of Poland and Hungary against Brussels may be initiated by the United States for the purpose of “rocking the boat” of the European Union. Just like rise of the extreme right in Europe looks launch of European “color revolutions”, for which there is no one to stand behind of it, besides America.
All new political forces act against Brussels. That is, for the dissolution of the European Union. And who besides the US wants that? In this sense, and in the story of the immigrants invasion the “hand of Washington” could also be involved. Someone has organized this invasion. And someone has paralyzed the borders of EU countries. A US interests in the EU division look very serious — quite sufficient to do that. And at the same time, the US have nothing to lose. They will be able to maintain the existing political influence in the wreckages and at the same time they will be three times more powerful than each of them. And, perhaps, for a few decades. And then for a long time nobody in the world economy will be “breathing down the neck” of America.
As for China. All the talks about that beating the US GDP volume will give to China leadership on the world market are based on a misunderstanding of the differences between quantitative and qualitative characteristics. GDP — is a quantitative characteristic. That is, the size of the GDP of China characterizes the “thickness” of its economy. And the thickness in the modern world affects the status only indirectly. Only the quality affects it directly. As an evidence here is the example. So, in the eighties, nine of the ten largest banks in the world were Japanese. But as the Japanese financial system was only “thick”, it has not changed Japan’s status in the world financial system, this achievement has not had even the slightest influence. The same with China, to become a real competitor to the US, it is required to have a different quality of the economy. And will it ever have this level of economy or not is a question. And if yes, it will happen in 20–30 years.