Brexit began with a huge gamble. David Cameron put all his money on a seemingly formidable horse and lost. The then Prime Minister announced the referendum two and a half years ago with the certainty of a win. He thereby sought to appease the eurosceptic wing of his party while certain that the Brits would not vote to leave.
But he made a huge mistake and lost all his previous achievements – savior of the Conservative Party and the architect of economic recovery – in the blink of an eye. He had no intention of leaving the European Union at whose table the “great” in Great Britain still carried some weight on account of the country’s economic and military muscle.
While the referendum – the previous one on the issue having been held in 1975 – was certainly justifiable, the country was not prepared for the outcome. This is reflected in every political and economic event since the vote. This was the first time a member state made an attempt to negotiate a divorce, and found that it was impossible to untangle all the threads – especially against an unhelpful Brussels.
Two and a half years later and Britain is still divided over the issue: should there be a Brexit? If yes, of what kind? The reform of the EU – moving the bloc towards a deeper political integration which also takes away chunks of national sovereignty – is a concern to most member states.
At present, the Marxist Jeremy Corbyn is gambling with the future of the country, rejects every agreement the government works out, with the sole aim of acquiring power. All through this big gamble, a single person was able to represent the interests of the people. Theresa May remains committed to the outcome of the referendum, even she personally was never a supporter of leaving the EU. But what the future holds for her or for Brexit, not even the shrewdest of pundits can guess.