48 Britain The EconomistJune 9th 2018
2 tertains hopes of becoming the world’s
biggest after America’s.
Galileo is run by the European Space
Agency, which is not part of theEUand in-
cludes non-members such as Norway. But
the European Commission provides the
money and takes the key decisions on how
it is spent. Its lawyers say these preclude
contracts with providers outside theEU,so
the commission wantsto stopGalileo
work by British-based firms after Britain
leaves the union next March. It is also en-
suring that non-members cannot block Ga-
lileo procurement decisions. After all,
Brexit means Brexit, jokes one Eurocrat.
The commission also insists that, as a
non-member, Britain cannot have full ac-
cess to Galileo’s “public regulated service”
(PRS), a militarily secure, unjammable part
of the project. Norway and America have
asked for access to thePRS. But theEUis re-
sisting it, on the argument that letting non-
members into such sensitive areas would
undermine the club’s “strategic autono-
my”, a new concept of questionable value.
If Britain were allowed in, others would
demand the same treatment.
This legalistic approach has proved a
red rag to British ministers. Unless theEU
changes its views on contracts and thePRS,
the government threatens to pull out of
Galileo altogether.Some continental com-
panies might pinch contracts from British
competitors. But losing their expertise
would delay the project and could add as
much as €1bn to the bill. Losing access to
British ground-stations on Ascension Is-
land and in the Falklands would be an an-
noyance. Britain’s suggestion that it might
try to recoup the money it has invested in
Galileo is unlikely to get far. But the threat
that, if it is cut out of the programme, Brit-
ain might build a satellite positioning sys-
tem of its own is more serious.
At least technically, itwould be feasible,
says Bleddyn Bowen, a space expert at
Leicester University. He reckons it could be
done at a cost of some £3bn-5bn. Some en-
thusiasts talkof sharing this cost with Aus-
tralia or Japan, and getting a new system
up and running almost as soon as Galileo
itself. But Mr Bowen thinks the idea is es-
sentially a bluff. The benefits from creating
yet anothersatellite positioning system
would be marginal, and the cost seems
prohibitive when the defence budget is un-
der immense pressure.
More worrying, says Sophia Besch of
the Centre for European Reform, a think-
tank, are the implications of going it alone
for wider defence co-operation. In January
2017 Theresa May was criticised when she
hinted that Britain’s future defence rela-
tions with Europe might be affected by the
terms of any Brexit deal. The prime minis-
ter later backtracked by promising that Brit-
ain’s defence commitments were uncondi-
tional. But the threat to exclude Britain
from Galileo has reopened the question.The government now says participation in
Galileo is a strategic choice that “will have
a permanent effect on our future defence
and industrial co-operation.”
For in the end it is a question of trust.
Britain is the closest military and security
ally that manyEUcountries have. France
and Germany want to involve Britain
more deeply in building up Europe’s mili-
tary capacity. If lawyers can obstruct future
co-operation with the British over Galileo
on security grounds, that sends a deeply
unhelpful message for working together in
other areas. That is why some EUcountries
think the commission is going too far in de-
manding British exclusion from the pro-
ject. Joschka Fischer, a former German for-eign minister, says Brussels is being
“stupid” over Galileo.
The row could also worsen the legal
and practical difficulties over broader co-
operation on domestic security. The EUar-
guesthat post-Brexit Britain cannot remain
a full member of Europol, the policing
agency, or the European Arrest Warrant
process for extradition. EUcountries sus-
pect that Britain may not always share
their commitment to data privacy. Mrs
May’s insistence on escaping from the ju-
risdiction of the European Court of Justice
is another obstacle. Security was once
thought to be one of the simplest parts of
the Brexit negotiations. Now even it is
proving to be trying. 7Culture warsBrexit v Bernard-Henri Lévy
S
INCE the vote to leave the European
Union, a striking number of Britons
have exhibited symptoms of a new
medical condition, “Brexit derangement
syndrome”.BDShas afflicted some of the
country’s most prominent figures. Lord
Adonis, a former Labour minister, has
argued that Brexit is “largely the creation
of theBBC”. Alastair Campbell, Tony
Blair’s former spin-doctor, took to the
seafront in Brighton to blast out “Ode to
Joy” on the bagpipes.
This week Bernard-Henri Lévy dem-
onstrated thatBDSis not just a British
phenomenon.BHL, as he is known, styles
himself as one of France’s leading public
intellectuals. He sports expensive suits,
white shirts unbuttonednearly to the
waist, and elegantly sculpted hair. He is
regularly quoted on a wide range of
subjects, from genocide to gastronomy.
Brexit, he is convinced, will make Britain
more insular and deprive theEUof its“liberal heart”. So far, so sensible. ButBHL
has also persuaded himself that he is the
man to stop this popular revolt.
On June 4th at the Cadogan Hall in
London he performed a one-man play
called “Last Exit Before Brexit”. French
was the most common language at the
bar, followed by German. The few who
spoke English did so with the plummiest
of accents. The play consisted of a 90-
minute monologue, culminating in the
rousing peroration: “Please remain; yes
you can; last exit before Brexit.”
The notion that a Frenchman standing
on a stage in Chelsea and berating the
British could change people’s minds
about Brexit was always far-fetched. But
BHL’s performance was even odder than
this suggests. He played himself, in a
hotel room in Sarajevo preparing a
speech on Brexit. He strode around the
room, called up images on his computer,
talked to people on the phone (Salman
Rushdie made a guest appearance),
jumped fully clothed into a bath and
spent the last half-hour soaking wet.
BHL served up a bit of red meat for his
bejewelled audience, denouncing Boris
Johnson, the foreign secretary, as a bigot
(loud applause), proclaiming that Brexit
would reduce Britain to a small island
(louder applause) and calling for “the
annulment of this disaster” (even louder
applause). But he devoted most of the
time to his hobby horses: Europe’s betray-
al of the Balkans, the ugliness of euro
notes (“Give us faces, not bridges!”), the
excesses of the #MeToo movement, the
wonders of his own hair, and his remark-
able ability to make women go rigid
during orgasm. It may not have been
great drama, but it was the greatest ex-
ample ofBDS yet seen.Remainers’ secret weapon: a play by a French philosopher, off Sloane SquareI think, therefore I ham