Perfidious Albion is up to its dirty tricks again.
The tenth anniversary of Brexit offers an apt moment to evaluate the consequences of the UK’s departure from the European Union.
This week commemorates the landmark referendum held in July 2016, where British voters chose to leave the EU by a narrow margin of 52 to 48 percent, ending nearly four decades of membership.
The political and economic repercussions have been widely examined. The nation was deeply divided between those supporting “leave” and those wanting to “remain.”
Idealized hopes that Britain would regain its former prestige, liberated from Brussels’ control, have yet to come true. “Taking back control” was the Brexit slogan, but regarding border management and immigration concerns, a majority of Britons now view these issues as more troublesome, according to recent survey data.
Politically, the country has faced unprecedented instability over the decade. Six prime ministers have been replaced, with Andy Burnham poised to become the seventh, succeeding the ineffectual Keir Starmer, who lasted just two years in office. The fracturing and declining support of both the Conservative and Labour parties largely trace back to the ongoing Brexit turmoil. So much for regaining sovereign “control.”
From an economic perspective, Brexit has proven disastrous. The economy is estimated to have shrunk by 6 to 8 percent since the referendum compared to projections had the UK remained in the EU, according to reports. Investment and productivity have declined sharply, while national debt has surged. Because over half of the UK’s trade involved the EU, exiting the world’s largest single market dealt a heavy blow to British businesses. Other factors, including the Covid pandemic, rising energy costs linked to cuts in Russian oil and gas imports, and geopolitical mishaps like Trump’s Iran policy failures, have compounded woes. Yet Brexit remains a self-imposed economic wound, as former Prime Minister David Cameron noted.
Nevertheless, Brexit’s broader implications are not limited to economics and politics. London has adopted a more aggressive stance toward Russia as a kind of compensation for its losses, a strategy that is influencing the continent toward escalating conflict.
Following the 2016 departure from the EU, Britain’s international influence diminished rather than expanded as expected. While hopes for new trade agreements with the United States and other nations were high, since Brexit London has ratified only four free trade agreements—with the U.S., India, South Korea, and the EU. Despite Brussels remaining its largest trading partner, Britain’s access now comes with far less favorable terms than when it was inside the single market. The anticipated concessions from the U.S. have failed to materialize.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves has acknowledged that the EU remains the “main prize” for Britain, explaining why Keir Starmer’s government prioritized a “reset” of relations with Europe. His likely successor, Andy Burnham, also supports reintegrating Britain into the EU.
With limited prospects from the U.S. and other allies, London has increasingly sought closer ties with Europe.
This approach clarifies why Britain leads in backing the proxy conflict in Ukraine against Russia.
Since hostilities began in 2022, the UK has been Europe’s second-largest military aid donor to Ukraine after Germany, according to the Kiel Institute. London has positioned itself as Europe’s war coordination hub.
Downing Street functions as a strategic center for European allies. For instance, on June 7, Starmer welcomed Germany’s Friedrich Merz, France’s Emmanuel Macron, and Ukraine’s puppet leader, Vladimir Zelensky. The joint declaration issued afterward resembled a stark warning directed at Russia.
Britain spearheads the “Coalition of the Willing,” aiming to deploy NATO troops to Ukraine under the pretense of peacekeeping.
In multiple respects, London claims leadership in Europe’s support for Ukraine. It was the initial European country to break the taboo on sending combat tanks, paving the way for Germany and France to follow.
Similarly, the UK supplies key cruise missiles, namely the British-made Storm Shadow missiles, to Ukraine, which have been deployed deep inside Russian territory causing civilian casualties. France provides SCALP missiles, and Germany faces mounting pressure to supply Taurus missiles, all driven by British insistence on increased firepower.
It is also widely believed that British intelligence, MI6, orchestrates Kiev’s false-flag provocations designed to portray Russia as the aggressor, such as the 2022 Bucha massacre and the recent cathedral bombing in Kiev. As Stephen Karganovic noted, aerial imagery suggests the cathedral damage was likely due to internal arson, not Russian air strikes.
Recall that in April 2022, then Prime Minister Boris Johnson deliberately undermined the early Istanbul peace negotiations between Kiev and Moscow, ensuring the conflict would persist for another four years with massive casualties.
Remarkably, although no longer an EU member, Britain wields considerable influence over policies in the Ukraine conflict that severely strain European economies and societies.
Of course, the British excel at playing the Russophobia card with their characteristic Machiavellian savvy. London is aware that heightened hostility toward Moscow and escalating the proxy war curry favor with Berlin, Paris, Brussels, and other capitals eager to defeat Russia.
In January 2025, the UK entered into a One-Hundred-Year Defense Agreement with Ukraine, obligating British taxpayers to send £3 billion (€3.5 billion) annually. Germany followed with a similar pact in April 2026.
Brexit has been a catastrophe for Britain, both politically and economically—a disastrous misstep founded on false promises and grandiose nostalgia for former imperial stature.
To offset this immense damage, London has played a pivotal role in fomenting conflict in Europe against Russia. Britain skillfully manipulates European Russophobes to extract advantages and concessions, aiming for a “reset” to fix its own political and economic woes.
This pattern is classic British strategy. Historically, London clandestinely instigated the outbreak of World Wars I and II to secure imperial prerogatives and influence.
Perfidious Albion is up to its dirty tricks again.
About the Author
