In this collection, ECFR's experts respond to Britain's 'out' vote and discuss what Europe should do next.freestock.org
What do we know about Brexit?
By leaving the EU Britain gives up unique ties and influence with its EU partners. They are fast adapting.
The Franco-German axis, the Big Three and the Weimar Triangle, are all well-known constellations of European heavyweights. ECFR’s EU28 Survey allows for dissecting the complex relations within ‘the Big Six’, evaluating these and other bilateral and trilateral inter-group relationships in the face of the Brexit.
The UK election has seen pundits lurch from one misguided certainty to another
The UK election result emphatically confirmed the sense that the political class is out of touch with popular sentiment.
Corbyn’s focus on the domestic issues behind the Brexit vote, rather than on Brexit itself, may prove to be the better campaign strategy.
The remaining 27 EU members have turned the page after Brexit much faster than the UK itself.
The Prime Minister’s opportunistic decision to capitalise on her strong domestic standing is complicated by the international context.
In an already divided society, the uncertainty of Brexit could breed instability.
Britain’s departure from the EU may make the case for its nuclear deterrent replacement harder to sustain.
In advance of the triggering of Article 50, ECFR sets out the red lines and potential vulnerabilities of member states to UK negotiating tactics on Brexit.
The trend for integration of global markets has softened and might soon even revert, which will force nation-states to rethink their trade strategies.
Trump will see May’s visit as a demonstration of weakness
London waves farewell to Berlin as Germany softens on EU dissent. But the goal remains: the EU’s survival
Europeans see Britain continuing to delude itself about the possibilities for life after Brexit.
Mark Leonard speaks with Tom Nuttall, The Economist's Charlemagne columnist, about Theresa May's Brexit speech.
With both sides ignoring the decline of the liberal world order, the Brexit process is set to result in tragedy for both the UK and EU.
A logical approach to predicting a Brexit deal.
Negotiations seldom go well if you do not understand where the other side is coming from.
It is hard to see what ‘red lines’ could be imposed on the government, but the ruling could be an important victory for thought and reflection over rabble rousing on both sides.
There is no escaping the fundamental tension between Britain’s need for economic ties with rising powers and the growing nativist sentiments at home.
It is not the absence of a strategy that is most troubling, but the fact that the government appears to be going into the negotiations with aims that are intellectually incoherent, even delusional.
Mark Leonard speaks with Cristina Manzano and Borja Lasheras about the new Spanish government, and with Conor Quinn about the recent UK High Court ruling that only Parliament has the authority to trigger Article 50.
Size does not necessarily equal strength, and the European Union has holes in its strategy.
Europe must narrow the gap between urban and rural areas, otherwise radical populists will continue to flourish in neglected communities.
As much as Berlin would like to prevent negotiations with the UK turning sour, it is hard to envisage any other outcome.
Theresa May seems to be looking for a compromise around freedom of movement in order to retain access to the Single Market.
Johnson did more than anyone to bury Britain’s European future; but his ultra-flexibility may yet prove to be its salvation.
The next phase of European integration must engage with - and provide safeguards against - the dark side of interdependence. Otherwise Brexit will be just the beginning.
With every terrorist attack, anti-migration parties will have a larger platform, but they will struggle to change policy.
In the absence of a comprehensive framework for post-Brexit defence cooperation between the UK and EU 27, the forgotten Letter of Intent agreement could provide a useful stop-gap.
When it comes to the building of Europe, Britain is out. In fact, London had checked out years ago, but there is no denying it any longer.
Policymakers in Brussels and national capitals must tackle the democratic deficit. Otherwise, questions about the legitimacy of decision-making will continue to undermine the Union.
It is because of the selfish elites that the anti-elites are having such a run.
Willing forces could start now to campaign for a second vote on a 60-40 basis.
“Out” is not a long word, or a difficult concept. But, as the post-referendum turmoil continues, many Brits are having obvious difficulty getting their heads around it.
The British people have spoken.
Even if the UK is a diminished power after Brexit international partners will still need its cooperation in the UN and NATO.
“Taking back control” should be the new slogan of a new political union, as only by joining forces can governments wrest control of fiscal policies, offer a new social contract and regenerate their democracies.
In the brouhaha following the United Kingdom’s historical vote to leave the EU, the two worst risks confronting Europe are complacency and obsession with the UK.
As the political earthquake caused by the UKIP-orchestrated British leave vote reverberates across the EU, the full force of European anti-establishment parties is hitting home.
The people have spoken. But yesterday’s vote to leave the European Union is only the beginning of what will be a long and uncertain process of divorce.