For some, Brexit heralds the beginning of taking back the U.K., a British version of Trump’s ‘Make America White Great Again’ if you will.

For others (read more informed, less bigoted), it is a short-sighted stab in the back to all who enjoy the freedoms that come with being a part of the EU.

Whatever your stance these are interesting times indeed, although the ‘divorce’ proceedings are set to be longer and more fraught with danger than even the most acrimonious separation.

Side note – if you missed Nigel Farage’s address to the EU Parliament yesterday do play catch up HERE, the man who led the Leave campaign showing just why most of the world can’t stand the sight of him.

To put it simply, in order to leave the EU the U.K. government must now invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. This grants them the right to leave, although at least one writer for the New Yorker believes that won’t happen all that soon – if at all.

Here’s why he thinks that will be the case:

Prime Minister David Cameron’s decision to resign in the fall has stopped the clock until a new leader of the Conservative Party is elected to replace him, which won’t be until the start of September. Even if Boris Johnson, the former mayor of London, who helped lead the Leave campaign, were to win the leadership vote, it’s not clear when he would invoke Article 50. In a column for the Telegraph on Monday, Johnson said that Britain’s departure from the E.U. “will not come in any great rush”…

If Cameron had invoked Article 50 on Friday morning, Britain would now be on its way out: the exit process is irreversible. But thanks to the Prime Minister’s clever maneuver—which is surely what it was—the country has some time to reflect on the consequences of Brexit…

One possibility being floated by some pro-E.U. campaigners is a vote in the House of Commons against invoking Article 50. During the weekend, a number of constitutional experts pointed out that, under the British system, sovereignty rests in Parliament, and so the Leave vote was purely advisory. “MPs are entitled to vote against it, and are bound to vote against it, if they think it’s in Britain’s best interest,” Geoffrey Robertson, a prominent British barrister, [said] “It’s not over yet.”

At this stage, it is impossible to say how all of this will play out: there are too many variables. When I started working on this post, my guess was that the odds of Brexit ultimately happening were about fifty-fifty, and possibly less. In the course of writing, I spoke to a couple of pro-E.U. people in London whose opinions I respect, and both of them said that I was being too optimistic. Passions have been inflamed, they pointed out, and many of the players have staked out positions that limit their flexibility.

Maybe I’ve fallen victim to wishful thinking; I hope not. The Britain I grew up in took pride in its common sense and pragmatism. Affinities for ideology and political extremism were regarded as suspect, European qualities. For the sake of Britain, and also of Europe, I hope that my countrymen and countrywomen rediscover their modest virtues before it’s too late.

I would say this is wishful thinking because, even though there seems to be widespread remorse amongst many Leave voters, to ignore the results of the referendum would stoke a very dangerous fire.

Like I said, interesting times ahead.

[source:newyorker]