Judging from the reaction, you might think that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer had just lost a war. One former cabinet minister labeled Starmer’s team a “surrender squad,” while a former prime minister called on Britons to “fight, fight and fight again for the freedoms the people voted for.”
In truth, Starmer had not surrendered anything. He had merely proposed a few tweaks to the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with Europe. His so-called reset is, if anything, too modest. It risks missing an opportunity to repair the UK’s economic wounds and strengthen its ties with the enormous trading bloc next door.
Brexit’s economic costs are now well documented. By official estimates, leaving the EU imposed a 15 percent reduction in trade as a share of the economy, leading to a 4 percent loss of GDP over the long term. Trade remains largely tariff and quota-free, but layers of bureaucracy — from rules of origin to value-added tax requirements — have hurt businesses on both sides of the English Channel.
Starmer’s proposals, such as boosting food and agriculture trade, securing mutual recognition of professional qualifications and easing mobility for performing artists, aim to chip away at these barriers. A deal with the EU — which wants visa-free travel to the UK for young people and access to UK universities at local tuition rates — is not hard to envision.
Yet even those small gains are far from certain. Starmer’s stance on youth mobility — oddly equating it with the “free movement” of people, which he opposes — could stifle any such progress. His refusal to rejoin the EU’s Erasmus+ exchange program is another missed opportunity. In any event, such measures would raise the UK’s GDP by 0.3 percent to 0.7 percent over 10 years — hardly making a dent in the lost output imposed by Brexit.
Both sides ought to think bigger. Starmer should ignore the hysterical voices in UK politics and listen to voters. Regrets over Brexit have grown more pronounced, as the economic wounds have become undeniable. He should do a better job of pitching repaired ties as, effectively, a much-needed stimulus measure.
For their part, the EU’s negotiators — still smoldering over Brexit — have been slow to acknowledge that closer cooperation could serve their own interests: boosting competitiveness, reigniting growth and rebuilding defense.
A recent survey found that many Europeans think a closer security relationship is worth making concessions in other areas. That could be a starting point for bolder dealmaking.
The key is to start small, as Starmer has, and focus on the mutually beneficial. Investment in electricity interconnectors would improve energy efficiency and reduce price volatility, for instance; the two sides should not wait until the expiration of an existing energy framework in 2026 to renew and improve that cooperation.
Similarly, aligning the UK with the EU’s carbon border adjustment would avoid incurring new trade barriers when it kicks in two years from now.
Ultimately, the UK should aim to rejoin the EU’s single market, restoring the economic benefits that were needlessly squandered after Brexit. In the meantime, the faster both sides embrace pragmatic steps to remove barriers, the sooner voters could see tangible benefits. A win-win, as they say.
There are moments in history when America has turned its back on its principles and withdrawn from past commitments in service of higher goals. For example, US-Soviet Cold War competition compelled America to make a range of deals with unsavory and undemocratic figures across Latin America and Africa in service of geostrategic aims. The United States overlooked mass atrocities against the Bengali population in modern-day Bangladesh in the early 1970s in service of its tilt toward Pakistan, a relationship the Nixon administration deemed critical to its larger aims in developing relations with China. Then, of course, America switched diplomatic recognition
The international women’s soccer match between Taiwan and New Zealand at the Kaohsiung Nanzih Football Stadium, scheduled for Tuesday last week, was canceled at the last minute amid safety concerns over poor field conditions raised by the visiting team. The Football Ferns, as New Zealand’s women’s soccer team are known, had arrived in Taiwan one week earlier to prepare and soon raised their concerns. Efforts were made to improve the field, but the replacement patches of grass could not grow fast enough. The Football Ferns canceled the closed-door training match and then days later, the main event against Team Taiwan. The safety
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama