����ֱ��

The process of delivering on the promise made by Britain’s Labour Party during last year’s election campaign to reset the UK’s relations with the EU is now well and truly underway, but only slowly. Last month, almost a year after Labour decisively won the general election, negotiators from both sides unveiled a deal that signals they are adamant about putting the bad blood of Brexit behind them.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Prime Minister Keir Starmer were beaming when they announced they had reached a new agreement that rectifies some of the damage caused by Brexit. Nevertheless, the relatively small scope of the agreement suggests that, rather than a revolution in relations between these two closest of neighbors, this agreement represents a slow evolution and that this incremental approach is bound to continue.

It is nine years since the British people decided in a referendum to implement Brexit, causing relations between London and Brussels to sour. The psychological scars caused by this unilateral decision have been at least as deep, if not deeper, than the practical implications of the separation. The very fact that, after decades of continuous expansion of this unique political project, one of its most powerful members was the first to leave, leading to years of acrimonious negotiations that were more about British domestic politics than what was in the interest of either, disappointed, or more precisely, angered Brussels.

Rather than a revolution in relations between these two closest of neighbors, this agreement represents a slow evolution

Yossi Mekelberg

With the UK under relatively Europhile new management, the path to a positive resetting of relations was paved, but it is still bumpy, mainly because of the rise of populist, anti-globalization and anti-immigration sentiments in both the UK and the EU. Starmer, borrowing from the world of sports terminology, referred to the signing of a trade deal with the EU as one that completed a “hat-trick of trade deals,” following similar agreements with the US and India in the preceding weeks. He also declared this was a “clear message sent across the globe that Britain is back on the world stage,” departing from years of policies that reflected the island mentality, not to mention the incompetence, of his Tory predecessors, who were still quick to criticize the fresh agreement.

To be sure, the deal is not even remotely a step toward the UK rejoining the EU, but it has kick-started what will be months of negotiations over many nitty-gritty details, some more controversial than others.

A big draw for the UK entering a new phase in the relationship was the EU’s consent to remove the need for health and veterinary certification, known as sanitary and phytosanitary checks, on exports of farm products, ranging from fresh vegetables and meat to dairy products and even timber and leather. In principle, this should never have been an issue, as the quality and standards in the UK did not change after Brexit. But in the poisonous atmosphere under which the divorce settlement was agreed in 2020, Brussels was in no mood to make it easier for a breakaway country.

This measure alone is a lifeline. For instance, small-scale sausage and dairy product makers will once again be able to sell into the EU without health certification, avoiding the fate of those that have already gone out of business as a result of the need for such certifications. Moreover, farmers in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland will see reduced checks on fresh food moving between them and Great Britain. Previously, they were caught up in the impossible conflict between the terms of the Good Friday Agreement that brought peace to Northern Ireland and Brexit. This is as much symbolic as it is helpful to struggling farmers.

What gave those in the UK who oppose closer ties with Europe some tailwind was the agreement over fishing rights

Yossi Mekelberg

What gave those in the UK who oppose closer ties with Europe some tailwind among the Conservatives and Reform UK — to the extent that, in another outburst of anti-European hysteria, the leader of the opposition Kemi Badenoch called the deal a “surrender” — was the agreement over fishing rights. It might have been the case that Starmer’s inexperience in negotiating on the world stage, or even being too keen on a deal, led to him agreeing to roll over the existing fishing deal for another 12 years, until 2038, providing access to UK waters for EU fishers. However, surrender it was not, as in any agreement it is the overall picture that counts and those who might lose out should be compensated. This is not only because it is fair, but also because it is prudent to avoid evoking anti-European sentiments.

It is no secret that what accelerated the new “entente cordiale” between the UK and the EU is the recognition that ensuring the defense of the realm — and, as a first step, winning the war in Ukraine — requires them to work closely together. This is now enshrined in the new document, which states that the “UK and the EU share a responsibility for the security of Europe.” For the Britons, the prize of beginning talks on allowing its arms industry to access Security Action for Europe — a €150 billion ($171 billion) EU fund providing loans for defense projects — awaits. This would consolidate the close partnership of the UK as part and parcel of the defense of Europe.

On at least two aspects of the new deal — the return of youth exchanges and British travelers once again being able to use e-gates when traveling to the EU — the psychological boost of being a partner is significant. The latter might not be a deal-breaker in relations, but after decades of whisking through terminals with a minimum of fuss, this Brexit hindrance symbolized for many the acrimonious separation between the Brits and the Europeans. Restoring access to e-gates will return the sense of close relations with our neighbors, even if not still belonging to the same family.

For young people, to be able to work and study in Europe with fewer restrictions will enhance their experience. And maybe this will be the generation that rediscovers Europe and being European, which will lead to a much-needed antidote to Brexit, as well as a remedy for a world that currently thrives on what separates us, not what brings us together.

• Yossi Mekelberg is a professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. X: @YMekelberg