The term 'Great' as a prefix to the mighty Britain, has for years represented the greatness of the typical British character. Contrary to popular belief, it isn't synonymous to what once was the richest or the mightiest power in the world. It rather reflects on core British values of realism, fair play, self esteem, and tolerance. All these, supported by civilised mannerism, often found conducive to harmonious relationships. Simple little things like standing in a queue, the genuity of saying Thank You, or making way for others, are not symptoms of surrender, but an integrated way to avoid unnecessary confrontation or friction.
The triggering of Brexit, and the follow-up formal letter to the European Commission written by the Prime Minister on 29th March, needs to be concieved with some coolness and caution. There is no point now to go back on the stand taken, and announcements made, by the Leave and Remain camps prior to the Referendum of 23rd June, 2016. Irrespective of omissions and commissions, the decision has been made. A very extensive and if I may call it, historic session in the House of Lords heard several wise words. Of course, the Commons has an upper hand and the Prime Minister was empowered to write the 6-page letter. By common consent, the tone of the letter remained realistic and resolute, as it should have been. However, the fact remains that now, the United Kingdom is treading unchartered waters.
It is a gamble. Now, to decipher whether one should call the decision arrogance, or false pride, is not my main purpose here. There are several pretentions, some with knowledge, but not in its entirety of the consequences of leaving the EU. On Wednesday, the 29th, in the Commons, a debate was held regarding bad deal, and no deal. But, the real question is; Does the British prefer any deal, however damaging or destructive? For the next two years, if not longer, there will be negotiations, and of course, UK has to look after its own interests. Fact to point is, the other 27 countries involved, are duty-bound to do the same.
UK's disassociation from the European Union is like an ugly divorce between a couple. It is a painful process. Unavoidably, it will will involve leaking out each others' muck and very often, in a dastardly way, one can't comprehend what the final package will hold.
In the meantime, we hear so many noises prompting serious concerns. Prime Minister May has already visited US, India, and China, and presently is in the Middle East. Her Chancellor, Foreign Minister, Defence Minister, and Trade Minister, all are globe-trotting, trying to negotiate, and prepare better grounds for trade deals in the future. Now and then, we also hear a supposedly plausible option of Commonwealth 2.0.
About 100 years ago, the imperial power of Great Britain vouched for imperial trade preferences. Of course, they were more or less preferential trade terms for Britain, and as history stands witness, countries like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, India, and other colonies were steadily cajoled into such "agreements".
India and UK
There is vast potential of trade and other cooperation between UK and India. India has to offer demand, demography, and democracy. While UK can too furnish several other skills, talents and resources. But let's be realistic. British trade between 27 countries accounts for almost 40 to 42 per cent of the total, while with India it is just 1.7 per cent.
Another self-inflicted problem for UK; As a Home Secretary, and now as Prime Minister, Theresa May's stand on the skilled manpower coming to UK is well-known, though not welcome, in India and other countries. You can't have trade without fairer movement of skilled manpower. There are so many direct and indirect claims about security and peace and the British contribution in the past and the potential for the future.
We have one information in this country, which is systematically ignored in our curriculum or general knowledge, that since the 1853 Crimean War, the British "victory" in the I and II World War was aided enormously by Her Empire.
In World War I, British India provided 1.4 million men on the fighting front, and another million were engaged in various war efforts like in manufacture, delivery and supply of ammunition and other war weapons. Thousands of Indians were killed to defend the freedom of the Colonial Master. Rajas, Maharajas, and tycoons of undivided India opened their treasuries to "donate" huge sums of money for the war efforts.
In World War II, India's contributions were gigantic. 4.2 million Indians participated in the war effort, and out of them 2.4 million stood in the battlefields of Europe, Asia and the Middle East. 74,000 Indians were killed. 800 million pounds (now almost 30 billion) were "lent" by the British India treasury to the war effort of the Imperial Power. Not only similar sacrifices of other countries of the Empire are not taught in schools and colleges, but it is deliberately, if I may say so, ignored or omitted in the general reporting. Shashi Tharoor's recent literary venture 'Inglorious Empire: What the British Did to India' has received wide coverage. Not only India, but even other former colonies are going to be cagey about the British intentions or promises.
27 countries of the EU know all these things. So all this charade about British protection, about the security of the Europe, is more or less just "a claim". After all, Britain is one of the founding fathers of the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance.
Maintaining Peace in Europe
Another intention which was more or less realised, was peace on the European mainland. For 70 years, there was no major war between the nations of Europe. The departure from EU, and the debate going on is very worrisome.
First of all, we need to embark on newer trade relationships with several countries. The enormous pressure of EU-UK separation, puts UK at a massive disadvantage. But, UK will survive. Now, to survive to one's satisfaction or to survive out of compulsion, as a mere existence, is the debate. Within two weeks of May's 29th March letter, British ministers began talking of going to war with Spain on the Rock of Gibraltar. Prime Minister May has to now announce in her Middle East visit that no war is envisaged. But look at tabloid papers. They are preparing themselves in the same mode of the Falkland War. Such negative attitude or reporting are capable of sowing seeds of discontent, dissatisfaction, suspicion, and insecurity. What was a peaceful continent for 70 years, is now inadvertently inviting some serious problems. It is currently on a risky, if not irresponsible journey.
Last week celebrated the 60th Anniversary of the process of the European cooperation. What an irony! Something which was created, necessary, desirable, durable, is now thrown away willy nilly for some strange reasons. Say in March 2019, negotiations do not arrive on acceptable terms for UK.What will happen then? God forbid some stupid statements create tensions between European countries. The confusion is unhelpful for economic development, especially for the UK.
I do not want to dwell on the problems within the present UK borders; in Scotland or in the island of Ireland. But perhaps we have opened the Pandora's box. The centuries old relationships and especially a reasonable piece in the northern Ireland since 1998 now hangs like the sword of Damocles. Clearly in Scotland, UK needs to be careful.
Let me dare to make two presumptions. May be when the agreeable end is not achieved after two years, the UK government, at the earliest opportunity, should follow the path of common sense and British characteristics. When the loss is overwhelming than the gain, a sensible person or administration prefers to maintain a status quo.
Even now is it not sensible to accept that it is better to deal with the devil we know than the devil we don't? It might be difficult to swallow false pride and arrogance, but history has taught us one lesson, it is that if you can't change it, accept it. However, one does need to have enough sense to see the difference.
