On the night of January 31, the United Kingdom formally left the European Union, and after nearly 50 years of union membership and three years of bitter division over voting to leave, the official departure moment has become a landmark. But to say that the British "have finally achieved exit from the European Union", as Prime Minister Boris Johnson says, is a kind of hopeless optimism. The next day, Britain started a new and uncertain stage, as it left the union, not the end.

The British government still needs to negotiate the terms of its future relations with the European bloc, a highly complex task that many suspect will be possible to complete by the end of the year, when another disastrous deadline looms. Meanwhile, the country will be stuck in a state of stalemate, and still bound by the laws and regulations of the union, but it is unable to form these laws, all of this pending the conclusion of commercial deals with other countries. At home, the negative effects of the Brexit divide will continue, and may reshape British policy for years to come.

The nightmare continues

Parliament agreed to pay a huge divorce bill to Brussels, but besides that much of Britain's future relations with the European Union are still unknown. Pessimists like William Keegan, a columnist for The Guardian, expect an economic catastrophe in manufacturing and agriculture. Government officials seem less prepared for detailed plans on how to manage the movement of goods, people and services.

The social rights and benefits of the 2.7 million citizens of the European Union who have applied to remain in Britain remain unclear. London has expressed its intention to leave the customs union and the single market for the union, and to use this freedom to conclude new business deals, including with the United States. Meanwhile, the government hopes to maintain easy access to markets via the channel through a special free trade agreement with the union. Of course, Brussels has no interest in the emergence of a "new Singapore" on the River Thames; therefore, the trade negotiations will be long and controversial.

Troubles on the road

A lengthy process means trouble, for London, and if Johnson fails to negotiate a satisfactory deal with the European Union, by the end of the year, the UK will exit the EU’s economic framework, with all the “hard Brexit” risks, including imposing a tariff for goods and services. British, supply chain disruptions, and others. Even if this worst-case scenario is avoided, the exit will cause costly turmoil in the British economy.

In a ridiculous development, the areas likely to be hit the hardest by the loss of regional aid to the European Union are strongholds of "Brexit" in the "Midlands" and northern England. In addition, London has signed trade agreements with a number of countries, including Lebanon, Tunisia and Liechtenstein, but this is unlikely to compensate for the loss of unrestricted access to European markets, with about 450 million consumers.

The possibility of transformation

In the end, arrangements with Brussels may be less dangerous than the arrangements that Britain should make with itself in the wake of all the tensions and struggles of Britain’s exit years, so British policy can change.

Indeed, in December the general elections demonstrated the tremendous political transformations brought about by the Brexit. However, the Conservative Party won the largest parliamentary majority since 1987, and received the highest vote since 1979. Under Jeremy Corbin, the Labor Party, by contrast, won the fewest seats since 1935, and suffered its fourth consecutive defeat.

Johnson owes his victory, most likely, to his focused message. He reiterated, with great discipline, the Tory mantra: “The Brexit must be accomplished.” Meanwhile, Corbin remained unclear on the issue of the exit, angering both the departing and the rest. Johnson also understood the appeal of the "Conservative Principle of One Nation", which mixes traditional nationalism with a commitment to social welfare services. The Conservatives strongly targeted the pro-exit strongholds and mining areas of northern England, which are traditional Labor Party strongholds, with pledges to end austerity and pump money; in many of these areas, they succeeded in gaining confidence.

Disabled parties

Currently, the Conservative government has a parliamentary majority, a withdrawal agreement signed with Brussels, and disrupted and dispersed opposition parties, which have largely unrestricted power in Westminster. This success may fade once the Labor and Liberal Democrats overcome the recent electoral shock and settle on new leaders, which could also lead to permanent political reorganization that addresses deep cultural divisions between youth and adults and between North and South.

After the overwhelming victory of the Conservative Party, Johnson admitted that Labor supporters had "lent him" their vote, based on his pledge to "complete Britain's exit from the union." Winning the hearts of these voters depends, in part, on the success or failure of the "one nation" gamble adopted by the conservatives. The government promised more public spending in northern England, especially on hospitals, higher education and railways. But these investments will take several years, and perhaps decades, to bear fruit, and at the same time, many northern cities face spending gaps.

Even if public investment ultimately improves living conditions in the regions north, it will not do much to address the cultural divisions that led to the vote in favor of Brexit in the regions, as happened elsewhere, in the country. And it seems that deep divisions between liberals and conservatives will persist, with the first side embracing globalization, multiculturalism and openness to social change, while the second retracts to nationalism, xenophobia and resentment of the loss of traditional values.

These cultural wars may end in Johnson's favor, but this is out of the question. If the exit advocates fail and the UK's strength, prosperity, and position decline, people may be disappointed with the government. With the political agenda again shifting to traditional causes of anxiety, such as health care and education, opposition parties, particularly Labor, may regain support in their strongholds. In this scenario, the December elections may prove to be an accidental deviation, and do not herald a long-term re-arrangement of populism.

Temporary armistice

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said that the signing of the Brexit agreement on January 24th was "a wonderful moment, which finally embodied the outcome of the 2016 referendum and put an end to many years of controversy and division." The "civil war" of "Brexit" has already ceased, at least for now. Meanwhile, most of those wishing to remain in the union have gone from denial to grief. They may turn to anger if the political and economic impact of leaving the union is catastrophic, as some expect.

It can be said that Johnson's hustle and bust about "regaining control" will be tested strongly. Leaving the European Union increased pressure for another referendum on Scottish independence. The imposition of customs duties on goods traded between Northern Ireland and Britain will likely accelerate the demand for the unification of the Irish island. Facing London's diminishing role in the world, the State Department will seek to foster transatlantic relations, as is always the case, but with unexpected results, given US President Donald Trump's doubtful loyalty and his love of tariffs, and costly divorce and shock may be just the beginning of the kingdom’s troubles United.

• 450 million consumers in the European market will be lost by Britain.

2.7 million European citizens awaiting adjustment to the UK.

• The Conservative party’s success may fade once the Labor and Liberal Democrats overcome the recent electoral shock and settle on new leaders, which may also lead to permanent political reorganization, which addresses deep cultural divisions between youth and adults and between North and South.

• Parliament agreed to pay a huge divorce bill to Brussels, but besides that much of Britain’s future relations with the European Union are still unknown. Pessimists like William Keegan, a columnist for The Guardian, expect an economic catastrophe in manufacturing and agriculture. Government officials seem less prepared for detailed plans on how to manage the movement of goods, people and services.