And so, the predestined Boris Johnson will take on the task of hauling Great Britain out of the EU. He himself declared this as soon as his appointment had been finalized, solemnly declaring that he will do so by the established deadline, October 31. 

Brexit shall go ahead, as decided by Britain’s citizens, while a great part of the world has attempted to eviscerate it of its meaning and assimilate the deadly injury to globalization.   

The end of sacred and wild globalization 

As of today, globalization, at least in its more “sacred and wild” form, as we have known it up to now, comes to an end; despite its numerous supporters, staunch opposers to all those who criticized its dynamics as being out of control, whom they labelled “sovereignty loving populists,” and enemies of the “magnificent progressive destiny”.

Sacred because it was a religion upheld by irrefutable dogmas.  Any criticism towards it was labelled as heresy, worthy of being subjected to public ridicule and attacked by the media. Wild because it had no rules if not that of the strongest, Corporate Finance, imposing its “laws” on its weaker subjects, the increasingly helpless citizens of the single states. 

Johnson, aka Britain’s Trump 

However, despite global consequences, Johnson is a figure who divides the public. Trump has obviously hailed him with enthusiasm as “a good man”, reminding us all he has been described as “Britain’s Trump.”

To define Boris a “good man” is somewhat risky, given the statesman’s extremist politics. But that is Trump, and obviously his appreciation takes into consideration the solid bond between himself and Downing Street’s new resident, and the fact that his line comes out of all of this strengthened. 

Yet to define Boris as “Britain’s Trump” could lead to misevaluations. Because while the two statesmen do embody the idea of a return to a strong nation state, their views on foreign policy differ profoundly. 

On never-ending wars 

Trump was elected to terminate the seemingly never-ending wars taking place, and to rebuild America’s ‘greatness’ on different foundations. By ending the disastrous period of war, Washington can finally focus on development, another prospect of global hegemony, no longer based on unrestrained intervention, but on unrestrained development instead. A return, under a different guise, to American isolationism. 

Boris does not have to deal with such a legacy. It is true that Britain has followed America into many conflicts, but always in a subservient position, then taking its share of dividends. 

Boris also feels that he is invested in the task of making Great Britain great again. His box of tools is the Anglosphere, to be used as the springboard a for a global relaunch. 

Such a mission, in contrast with Trump’s, could bring his country greater assertiveness at an international level. The challenge can only be undertaken once the Brexit issue, which is currently monopolising resources and energy, has been resolved.  

The British Empire and Iran

While it is impossible to restore the British Empire, which at its height ruled a fifth of the world’s population, there is no denying that is the reference model. 

The man is extremely ruthless, which in geopolitics is a double-edged sword: it can lead to unexpected openings as well as dangerous situations. Johnson is a variable which we have yet to discover, a variable forced to deal with the differences between two systems: the American one, which grants its President great powers – the same powers that are denied to the British Prime Minister by Britain’s democracy. 

That being said, shortly before being elected, Johnson declared that he would not follow his American ally into a war against Iran. Many hope that he will be true to his word. 

Regarding that matter, he is currently having to deal with the critical situation regarding the British oil tanker seized by Iran, and the Iranian tanker seized by authorities in Gibraltar. A stalemate which complicates his debut onto the scene of international politics.

We shall see whether he will help Trump to pull himself out of the conflicts the neocons have dragged him into, or if he will also find himself trapped in the criticalities passed down to him.

Is the EU being caught in the crossfire?

Johnson does, however, have one policy in common with Trump, and that regards the EU which, following Brexit, will be considered by Great Britain both a partner and an antagonist. Trump can’t be said to be hiding his intent to tear apart what currently appears united. 

Such a design might well be supported by London, as it would benefit its position in global competition: it is easier to compete against individual nations rather than against a geopolitical giant such as the European Union. 

Moreover, Great Britain has always worked against the EU, participating only when it had no other choice, yet always successfully establishing a privileged partnership compared to other member countries, while diluting its strengths pushing for expansion toward the east. 

This could lead to converging forces within the Anglosphere attempting to break the Union or at least to diminish its operational abilities. 

 Ps. The Washington Post pointed out that during the White House campaign, Johnson had defined the then presidential candidate Trump of demonstrating “a quite stupefying ignorance that makes him, frankly, unfit to hold the office of president of the United States.” 

Politics is the art of the present…