ACCRA — The decision by the UK on Friday June 24, 2016 to leave the EU came as a shock to many people. Polls closing barely days before the start of voting on Friday claimed to give the “Remain” constituency the lead. It seemed a forgone conclusion that Remain will win the day. But could the purported polls giving the edge to the Remain camp have been a case of psychological statistical warfare to skew the vote toward the Remain option? We do not know but can only guess. What does the vote by Britain to leave the EU mean and what are the implications for British-African relations and EU-African relations?

The EU behemoth which comprised 28 members before the decision of Britain to leave has an interesting structure which we will explore. The EU as a system has five unelected presidents. We have (1) the unelected president of the European Commission, Jean Claude Juncker, (2) the unelected president of the Euro Group, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, (3) the unelected president of the Euro Summit, Donald Tusk, (4) the unelected president of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz and finally (5) the unelected president of the European Central Bank, Mario Draghi, a Goldman Sachs alumnus. The five unelected presidential system is not a figment of our African imagination. This is a report from the horse’s own mouth, “The Five Presidents’ Report: Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union.”

These five unelected bureaucrats decide the fate of the 500 million or so citizens of the EU. To understand how undemocratic the structure is, the European parliament is uniquely the only parliament in the world that cannot propose legislation. The unelected officials of the European Commission led by Jean Claude Juncker is the sole body that proposes and formulates legislation. The EU Parliament just exists to rubber stamp the decisions. It is as if the office of the president of the Republic of Ghana proposes and formulates all laws which are then rubber stamped by the parliament of Ghana. That system is not democratic and is rather more representative of North Korea than anything else.

These unelected bureaucrats in Brussels make decisions for 500 million people without bearing any accountability for the good and bad of their actions. The austerity plans pursued with Nazi maniacal resolve by the European Central Bank has resulted in the words of the above mentioned report: In massive asset and property bubbles, over 18 million people unemployed across the EU, large-scale unemployment with over 50 percent youth unemployment in Greece, Spain and Portugal. The reality of the economic situation in the EU is at odds with the rosy picture that many miseducated Africans, economic and political refugees from MENA have of the EU.  The neoliberal decisions of an unelected minority have caused widespread dissatisfaction among working class folks in the EU.

The decision 52 percent to 48 percent by Britain to leave the EU has led to doomsday predictions about its disastrous effects on the British economy. But does one need to be in the EU to thrive economically? Norway with its 5 million population is not a member of the EU but is part of the European Economic Area where a free trade zone is prospering. We should recall that Norway in 1995 rejected EU membership. Another country which is not part of the EU is Switzerland but which has a free trade agreement with the EU. Switzerland with its 8 million population is doing quite well economically. The UK with its 65 million population and much larger economy could negotiate such agreements with the EU. A possible danger for it could be the threat of a new Scottish vote for independence which could see the UK lose up to a third of its economic output but it would still be a bigger economy than Norway or Switzerland.

The hysterical reaction to Brexit in the western elite is due to the blow dealt to their plans for a closer EU more firmly ruled by the unelected officials in Brussels that are in turn completely under the control of the American Deep State and its Wall Street “Masters of the Universe”. A fragmented EU deals a blow to the American Deep State’s aim of using a tightly controlled monolithic EU hammer as a geopolitical tool to maintain their decaying hegemony as the American so-called Washington Consensus model crumbles, due to the geopolitical changes taking place in the world today.

Much of African-British trade which if carried out under the general auspices of EU trade agreements could be renegotiated with African countries represented by the AU or regional blocks such as ECOWAS, pressing to take advantage of the situation by seeking more favorable trade conditions in African- British trade. Another contentious area is the economic partnership agreements (EPA) that the EU negotiated with African Communities like ECOWAS. Many of these agreements are unfavorable to African countries as they do not give unfettered access to EU markets as they claim, but rather controlled access to protected internal EU markets.

Regional organizations like ECOWAS should take advantage of the current uncertainty to press for new agreements that are more favorable for African trade with the now reduced EU community.  A further weakening of the EU with possible Exits by other countries in the EU is on the whole geoeconomically beneficial to Africa. It will void many of the so-called economic partnership agreements concluded by the 19 trillion EU behemoth and the much smaller African economic communities, agreements that stifle the ability of African countries to industrialize and develop internal markets, as these agreements do not allow adequate long term protection of infant industries which is essential to any long term industrial development plans.

Brexit is geopolitically good for Africa since a weaker and less monolithic Europe gives Africa more options in playing different sides to carve out more favorable trade and economic terms for herself.  Therefore, the tears being shed by miseducated Africans mourning Brexit is surprising and downright pathetic. Whichever nation exits the EU is geopolitically and economically advantageous for Africa.


  1. The Remain propaganda machine has worked hard and fast. They still haven’t given up. The brand the Leave movement as a racist xenophobic bunch of welfare seeking racists. The level of hypocrisy here is astounding. Remain is not racist? Cameron is not racist? Cameron is not a thief? Cameron does not evade taxes? The idea of super-nations without the conquest of battle is a terrible one. If you want to conquer the world, let’s see you do it with balls – not with thievery, cunning, disinformation and propaganda.

  2. That is a legitimate point as are the points raised in this insightful essay. What proponents of the EU government and EU hegemony have succeeded in doing is paint the other side as a Muslim hating bunch. Only when you look carefully, it’s the EU through NATO that continues to fund and destabilize much of the Islamic world – not supporters of the Leave people.

  3. Perhaps. I am not so sure what the fine details of their outlook entail except a strong sense of independence from an increasing overreach of an un-elected government at the EU. That is sufficient reason to wiggle out of the EU, if you asked me. As for the WWIII, the mainstream media is carefully sidestepping the issue and refuse to enlighten the masses on the real threat we continue to face as NATO gathers armies around Russia’s borders. If this Brexit vote means that Britain can contain some expectations in Europe about war with Russia around the EU nations, it’s possible that a World War III might be delayed or even prevented. Sometimes nationalism is a bad thing, if it’s deployed for the enslavement and oppression of others. But nationalism as independence from a federal block that terrorizes the world and poses a threat to global security, could be a good thing. We’ll see.

  4. They want the eurosceptic Corbyn out so that they can replace him with someone like the sissy-slut ass-licker Chuka Ummuna or even Mr Greaves. With Corbyn gone, they will attempt to veto the sovereign will of the people.

    • I have been enjoying your hyperbole over the EU referendum. It is been quite interesting. You are missing the substance of the rebellion against Jeremy Corbyn , and I am not surprised. The EU , bad as it is, has been the main instrument for the economic and social ‘upgrade’ of many of the towns and even counties in the UK. Guess who has been responsible for the marginalisation of those towns and counties? The same camp from which the referendum came , and who have been leading the BREXIT campaign. And guess what they would be doing to those councils outside affluent London when the shit hits the fan? Budget cuts ! Yes, and Jeremy Corbyn ran around like a guinea fowl suffering from dysentery and allowed the Tories to direct the attention of his strongholds to a single issue BREXIT is not even in the position to resolve. How would Labour fare with such a leader in the coming elections? And I can bet my last pound on it that you did not factor the current leadership crisis and its economic effects into your punditry, or did you?

      • This is like saying that the monthly “working tax credits” the poor receive (soon to be universal credit) is an “economic upgrade”. It is not. The UK pays certain fees to be part of EU and foregoes certain taxes that it would otherwise have imposed. It is true that this is also the case for all other members. The main principle here is that a tax rebate in the form of investment is not an upgrade.

  5. The treachery of the pro EU labour MPs has shocked me to my core. These are the same MPs who voted for Iraq, Libya, Syria. If after this you still vote Labour then there is no hope for you.

    Here are members of a purported mass party who demonstrate open hostility and contempt for the masses and who now seek to topple the democratically elected leader of their party because he sides with the masses.

    These are the same MPs who voted to socialise private debt and who pretend no linkage between that action and the subsequent cuts to welfare.

    • First of all, tax credits are indeed an economic upgrade because governments are not obliged to top up people’s wages. Secondly, that and the EU funds to the economically depressed cities are a policy redress for what the political economy of the UK is not in the state to correct. Fact. The towns and counties wouldn’t be in that situation if the London-based cared hals as much for their welfare.

    • An economic upgrade would be something like scrapping ad valerum and the poll or council tax.

      Giving people money you have already taken from them through open and stealth taxation is no economic upgrade.

      It is to the credit of the provincial voters that they saw through the appearances the EU wanted them to see.

      The EU will now make them pay to discourage others from doing same. What is important here is that for the first time in a long time — the spin failed.

    • And lest I forget, your arguments seem to be predicated on a primordial concept of the state which I am sure you know is a fallacy. There is nothing sacrosanct about the UK as a state. It is just a historical incident, and as the agitations in NI and Scotland show, it may end up as a two-country state. If the UK really wants to give the people democracy as Brexiters have been arguing, they should break up the Union and allow people to be governed at the county or borough level or even better , as households

    • Now, it is most certainly true that a lot of the town’s that voted leave benefit disproportionately from EU investment. But their choice demonstrates — rightly or wrongly — that they prefer to be out of the EU. At least they have a choice. They are citizens of a state that is strong enough to resist the EU. France, Greece, Ireland and others voted Same and were ignored.

  6. The statements from the leaders of those counties suggest a buyer’s remorse. Many are insisting on eating their cake while having it firmly in wraps

  7. Corbyn has gone down in my esteem for not standing up to his beliefs. He was a closet Brexiter. He should have had the courage of his convictions and come out openly to Leave.

  8. I disagree. He is a socialist in a party full of neoconservatives and neoliberals. If I recall he was threatened and advised by people he respected to campaign for remain. Any undergraduate politicAl science student who knows his political history would have known he was for out. Good for him. I am hoping that they will topple him. Labour will be ought of power for a generation or more. Progressivism has always been opportunistic. This is the same labour party that opposed joining Europe in the 60s and 70s

  9. As in the case of the USSR and Russia where all roads led (and still lead) to Moscow, London dominates the U.K.’s population, politics, and economics. London is a global city that is as much a magnet for international migration as a center of finance and business. London voted to remain in Europe. The rest of England, London’s far flung, neglected, and resentful hinterland, voted to leave the EU—and perhaps also to leave London. At the end of the divorce process, without careful attention from politicians in London, England could find itself the rump successor state to the United Kingdom. If so, another great imperial state will have consigned itself to the “dust heap of history” by tying its future to a referendum.

  10. For those who know these things it is by no means a surprise that so many of the women Jeremy Corbyn appointed to his shadow cabinet have abandoned his campaign. Margaret Thatcher knew this truth instinctively and did not make it. It simply is this — do not trust women to demonstrate loyalty in the heat of battle.

  11. Here is how preposterous the whole thing is. Every sitting Tory member of Parliament voted for the act that authorised the referendum and all but 1 labour MP voted against the act. Why do you think they did? At prime ministers questions more than half of the MPs who stood up to speak mentioned racism or made references to racist attacks. These shills never learn.

    Why hold a referendum if you do not want to loose it?
    The next time I read any post about a second vote, I will be very cross. Voters acted according to the will of Parliament. Parliament wanted a referendum. They got it. They must now accept it.

  12. Geopolitically, this may be good but lets consider the other side of the coin. Will a BREXIT mean a return to neo-imperialism and a more aggressive policy of the Britain towards its former colonies? It is most likely that the loss of Markets and Trade deals within the EU area may mean a renewed interest of Britain in its former colonies. Britain may persuade them to look more closely to her rather than other trading partners. I am inclined to this thinking because of the observation of the renewed interest of Turkey in Africa. Following its lost of trade Business with Russia (recall the shooting down of the Russia plane), Turkish leaders have turned to Africa to deepen trade ties which will provide the conduit for merchandice to make up for the trade deficits arising from the freeze in relations with Russia. The same scenario is most likey, I think, to happen with BREXIT. We can only wait to see what happens within the coming two years when Britain has to complete the process to finally exit.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here