Five years after the United Kingdom departed from the European Union, the lofty promises of Brexit lie in stark contrast to reality. Advocates envisioned a liberated and thriving economy, freed from Brussels’ bureaucracy. Rather, those dreams are deflated. The economy has stalled, future growth forecasts have dimmed and billions in trade with Britain's close neighbor have gone lost. Rather than bringing prosperity, Brexit has only added to financial troubles and left the U.K. struggling with its consequences.

Immigration, a cornerstone issue of the Brexit campaign, remains unresolved. Even diehard Brexit supporter Nigel Farage admits its fiasco and admits that Britain has not reaped the advantages previously envisioned. Notwithstanding, the Labour Party holds onto Brexit as though it were a symbol of pragmatism inspired by a sweeping election triumph. Many wonder if Britain will ever really reconcile its post-Brexit reality with its pre-Brexit aspirations, given this persistence in the face of growing evidence of the financial damage wrought by this historical break.

Neither trade nor cooperation

Although the possibility of rejoining the bloc in the 2020s would be politically unworkable for the U.K., which remains outside the European Union, there is a clear wish on both sides to rebuild connections. The current EU-U.K. Trade and Cooperation Agreement, negotiated under former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, embodies the harsh realities of a "hard Brexit.” Uniquely in the history of trade negotiations, it raised barriers instead of lowering them, leaving both economies grappling with diminished connections. The deal, more of a rushed compromise rather than a forward-looking model, poses challenges, particularly for the services industry, which is a cornerstone of economic activity for both the U.K. and the EU. These challenges point to the limitations of the agreement, which was more politically motivated than based on long-term practicality. Strangely absent from the plan was mention of military or security policy, although previous discussions clearly hinted at increased cooperation in these key areas.

Proposals included the U.K. playing a role in EU military initiatives and foreign ministerial discussions, reflecting shared interests on global issues. However, Johnson’s administration abruptly shifted its stance during negotiations, sidelining security cooperation and highlighting the disconnect between complementary ambitions and short-term political maneuvers. The 2020 EU-U.K. Trade and Cooperation Agreement was a product of urgency rather than foresight, negotiated in a mere eight months and leaving much to be desired. It is a skeletal framework that has since revealed its cracks, particularly as global events like Russia’s invasion of Ukraine underscore the pressing need for robust U.K.-EU security and foreign policy collaboration. By 2025, a more general agreement seems inevitable to handle these disparities.

Economically, the deal turned out to be something of a mixed bag. After five years, its physical drawbacks have clearly been exposed, erecting obstacles to commerce and trade. British business organizations, including the powerful Chambers of Commerce, have heightened issues that are usually handed over to legislators and emphasize the financial cost of the present system. Brussels, however, played its cards shrewdly. The EU secured a zero-tariff, zero-quota agreement for goods – where it holds a surplus – while conceding little on services, an area of British strength. Given this one-sided result, London has little choice but to think about renegotiations. The longer this agreement lingers unaltered, the more urgent reform becomes. For both sides, adapting to post-Brexit realities will demand a recalibration of interests and a willingness to compromise in an increasingly uncertain world.

Must comply with Brexit

Amid a fraught post-Brexit landscape, there’s growing momentum in the U.K. for reestablishing a closer economic relationship with the European Union. For parties like the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party, this aspiration amounts to nothing less than rejoining the bloc. Yet such a move feels increasingly improbable. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has firmly ruled out a return to EU membership, and the Conservatives – purged of pro-European voices during Boris Johnson’s reign – are showing no appetite for reopening that door. Within this political generation, the chances of reversing Brexit are very small. Starmer has turned away from idealism and is aiming to make Brexit work better. Once consumed by the polarizing "Leave versus Remain" dichotomy, public debate has turned toward efficient administration. Starmer's position shows a sharp understanding of the political turmoil that followed the 2016 vote. A definite post-Brexit plan never emerged under Conservative control, so the country was floundering in uncertainty.

Starmer realizes that reentry into the EU would demand great political currency and run the old battle risk. By steering clear of this flashpoint, Labour can redirect its energies toward stabilizing the fragile economy and fractured politics – a much-needed recalibration after years of upheaval. The upcoming 2025 U.K.-EU renegotiation is unlikely to deliver the sweeping changes some 2016 Remainers might hope for. The approach could mirror Switzerland's altering relationship with the EU – a sequence of incremental, bilateral treaties over decades – rather than a total reset. This is an important parallel because in 1992, Switzerland narrowly rejected entry into the European Economic Area, rather choosing to negotiate several contracts with Brussels to safeguard its financial interests.

This piecemeal approach could help transform the post-Brexit terrain of the U.K. without reigniting the heated debates of history. Less daring but still effective, this pragmatic approach allows for a gradual revamping of U.K.-EU relationships, thereby bypassing political turmoil and addressing pressing gaps in the established framework. If it follows the path of similar engagements, The U.K.’s post-Brexit saga may come to embody one of the great ironies of the 2016 referendum. Though 52% of voters ostensibly chose to sever ties with the EU, London has been consumed with the continent ever since.

Mutualist relationship

Nearly a decade later, the U.K.’s relationship with Brussels remains unresolved, leaving vast political energy tethered to Europe rather than breaking free. Over time, public and political perspectives on EU engagement may shift, whether toward deeper integration or further estrangement, as circumstances and priorities evolve. The stakes extend well beyond Britain. For the EU, too, fostering a constructive partnership with the U.K. under a Starmer-led government could yield mutual advantages. In an era of geopolitical upheaval, the opportunity to stabilize and strengthen ties should not be overlooked – by either side.

Keir Starmer faces a defining moment for Britain’s post-Brexit trajectory, and history won’t remember timidity kindly. To revitalize the U.K.’s flagging economy, his government must dare to forge deeper economic ties with the European Union – an audacious but necessary step toward a comprehensive trade and partnership agreement. Britain’s future lies closer to the EU’s vast market than in a quixotic chase for investment in far-flung corners of the globe. Starmer has political capital to spend, backed by numbers that justify bold moves even if they unsettle the political right. Criticism will come, but those who voted for Labour didn’t seek continuity; they wanted relief from economic struggles and hope for a brighter horizon. So far, the Labour government has offered little in the way of an uplifting vision. Starmer’s challenge is to articulate a dream that resonates – not just to mend economic wounds but to chart a course for national renewal.