Heavily trailed as it was, the lack of progress at a summit once seen as make or break surprised few European newspapers. Many said a no-deal Brexit was now looming – and doubted Theresa May had the domestic authority to avert it.
“Brexit is like Groundhog Day,” wrote Jean Quatremer, the veteran Brussels correspondent of the French daily Libération. “For almost two years now we’ve relived the same scene: one country ceaselessly presenting divorce terms that are entirely unacceptable to its soon-to-be-ex EU partners.”
The insurmountable stumbling block had been the same since article 50 was triggered in March 2017, Quatremer said. By insisting that the UK could not stay in the customs union or the single market, the British prime minister had voluntarily ensnared herself in the problem of the Irish border, “springing the hard Brexit trap”.
Like every other suggested solution, extending the transition period to give more time for talks would run into the opposition of the “Brexit fanatics”, he added. “So we’re back at the beginning again – and all because Theresa May does not have the necessary authority over her own party.”
Le Monde said it was clear that May “needed more time to reach political agreement at home” on the EU’s proposed solution to the Ireland problem – a problem that it, too, said had been plainly inevitable ever since the prime minister’s Lancaster House speech laying out the UK’s red lines.
In the Netherlands, the NRC Handelsblad said many EU leaders were willing to grant May a little extra time to reach political agreement back home. The make-or-break summit could still take place in December, but “the two sides are slowly but surely running out of time to finalise the divorce papers before the UK leaves.”
The Berlin daily Der Tagesspiegel said in an editorial that the closer the planned Brexit date drew, the more likely it seemed that Britain’s departure would be disorderly, and the more complex the possible consequences appeared.
“How much time would be lost by a heavy goods vehicle having to undergo customs checks at an English port? How will Erasmus students be affected? What would a disorderly Brexit mean for planes landing and taking off?” it asked.
The paper said both sides had made clear they do not want a no-deal Brexit. But a deal could not come at any price, it added. “The most important thing will be for the EU27 to retain their solidarity and not allow the British any special arrangement that would endanger the EU’s crown jewels – the single market.”
Under the headline “The principle of hope”, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung was more conciliatory. “No one of sound mind, on the continent or the other side of the Channel, can favour a ‘hard Brexit’,” the paper said.
“The costs to the economy would be immense. The uncertainties for businesses and citizens, for students, researchers and travellers would be huge. It is right to prepare for this situation. But what would be even better is if both sides invested energy and creativity in finding a negotiated solution. If that requires compromise, so be it.”
In Spain, El País detected a calmer tone in Brussels than at the previous summit in Salzburg. “May, at least, can return home without the sense of defeat that she took from Salzburg, which led to her dramatic address to the British people accusing the European partners of having disrespected her,” the paper said.
But it was clear that the underlying signal from the EU27 remained the same. “This time, at least, the formalities of good behaviour were observed,” it said. “But the Brussels message, while more polite, was just as demanding: ‘Keep calm and carry on … but not for too long.’”
