By James Xu '18

About two weeks ago, British Prime Minister David Cameron amped up his rhetoric while negotiating his demands with the European Union, claiming that the “status quo is not acceptable” and he will not rule out an exit if those demands are not met. In the meantime, Cameron has promised a “yes-no” referendum on the status of EU membership. The sentiment of an EU exit has been growing steadily in the recent years, starting from a fringe movement to “too close to call” at the current stage.The biggest issue Britain takes with the EU is the loss of some political and economic sovereignty. Because some EU legislation supersedes the laws of individual member states, Britain has to abide by some of the EU regulations that are not in its best interest. The pro-exit website Better Off Out listed 10 main motives; notable reasons include the freedom to fully control the national border, the ability to negotiate trade deals with non-European countries, and the restoration of some of the British traditions, including its unique legal system. All of these are tied to the loss of legislative power to the EU, and David Cameron indeed attempts to address those concerns. His top negotiation priority includes the right for Britain to reject migrant workers (mainly from Eastern Europe such as Poland) from claiming benefits that are granted by the EU. Other demands are also related to greater independence, such as giving the British parliament power to block EU legislations, preventing Eurozone countries from imposing their will on non-Eurozone countries, and guaranteeing non-commitment to the principle of an ever closer union.At this juncture, Britain sits in a peculiar situation. Historically speaking, France and Germany both have taken a large role in the European affairs, and now they are working towards the vision of a single European entity. The British Isles, on the other hand, mainly stay out of European conflicts, except when the hegemon of the continent becomes too powerful, in which case Britain would intervene and attempt to restore the balance of power. Therefore, on the stance of EU, Britain is only reaping the benefits of the EU while avoiding as many drawbacks as possible. In this very moment, with growing concern over the influx of migrant workers, along with progressively beneficial trade ties with China, Britain is experiencing cost increases and falling benefits. When the cost and benefit analysis no longer works in its favor, Britain wants out.The hypothetical departure of Great Britain will not heavily impact the European Union. As stated before, Britain is isolated, and does not contribute much to the infrastructural development in poorer member states. Britain also doesn't accept many refugees - failing to take refugees will make it harder to alleviate pressure from the migrant crisis.The impact on Britain, however, is heavily debated. Many argued that, because the EU remains the largest global consumer, the free trade within the European Union contributes to the success of many British businesses. In addition, the inflow of cheap labor from Eastern Europe allows Britain to produce at a relatively lower cost, which benefits both businesses and consumers, therefore propelling British economic growth. Based on these two factors, many argued that Britain would lose 2% of its GDP if it were to lose membership. The opposing side argues that loosening regulations by the EU will allow Britain to negotiate better deals with both desired member states and other nations, thereby making up for the loss. Let us see how this unfolds.Sources:http://www.theweek.co.uk/eu-referendumhttp://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/07/david-cameron-exit-warning-eu-reformhttp://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/110515/will-uk-leave-eu.asp?utm_source=NTU&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NTU-11/9/15&utm_term=news-to-use