Dear Editor,The historic British referendum on June 23, 2016 has perhaps placed in the hands of our European Union (EU) a couple of stunning cards to play in order to improve our position in the international arena. The Brexit decision was very controversial as the percentage of people that voted for Brexit was not much higher than those that voted to remain in the EU (51.9% voted to leave whilst 48.1% voted to remain). In addition, there were great differences between different territories (eg, 62% of Scotland voted to remain) and age ranges (eg, 73% of 18-24 year-olds and 62% among 25-34s voted to remain).1 A recent debate on the impact of Brexit on research was held on May 8, 2017 at the Royal Institution in London, and organised in collaboration with EuroScience and the European Academy. The debate clearly demonstrated on one hand the lack of preparedness of the science community,…

The British people vote to withdraw from the European Union (Brexit) in 23 June 2016 referendum is one of the most important events occurred in the European Union since its formation. Brexit can highly affect the future status of the EU in the international system and the relationship between the EU and other regions of the world. Withdrawal of the UK from European Union occurred after the agreement reached between Iran and E3+3 on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and at the time when Iran-EU relationship seemed to improve, so this departure can highly shape and affect Iran-EU relationship. The question this paper addresses is that how the Brexit would affect the relationship between the EU and Iran. To answer this question, the hypothesis proposed here is that the Brexit would improve the relationship between Islamic Republic of Iran and the European Union by decreasing the transatlantic weight and the US-oriented tendency in the EU. This article uses descriptive-analytical approach.

In a referendum conducted in the United Kingdom (UK) on June 23, 2016, $51. 6\\%$ of the participants voted to leave the European Union (EU). The outcome of this referendum had major policy and financial impact for both UK and EU, and was seen as a surprise because the predictions consistently indicate that the ``Remain'''' would get a majority. In this paper, we investigate whether the outcome of the Brexit referendum could have been predictable by polls data. The data consists of 233 polls which have been conducted between January 2014 and June 2016 by YouGov, Populus, ComRes, Opinion, and others. The sample size range from 500 to 20058. We used Singular Spectrum Analysis (SSA) which is an increasingly popular and widely adopted filtering technique for both short and long time series. We found that the real outcome of the referendum is very close to our point estimate and within our prediction interval, which reinforces the usefulness of SSA to predict polls data.

Over the past century, the United Kingdom has transitioned through various international roles, from a global superpower during its imperial era to a key partner within the European Union. Brexit, however, has triggered what many scholars describe as a foreign policy ‘identity crisis’. This paper challenges this conventional narrative by applying an ontological security framework to investigate how EU membership and the European integration process themselves represented an identity crisis for many Britons. The analysis explores the emotional motives behind Brexit by examining how Euroscepticism, combined with a desire to reclaim Britain’s ‘islandness’ identity, contributed to the decision to leave the European Union. Employing a thematic narrative analysis, the research examines the interaction between identity-based motivations and broader political and historical contexts to reveal new understandings of the multifaceted factors driving Brexit and its enduring effects. By investigating ontological security concepts such as existential threat, continuity disruption, and the restoration of narrative identity, the paper argues that EU integration itself, rather than Brexit, was perceived by many as the principal threat to Britain’s biographical narrative and national identity. These insights contribute to understanding how identity-based anxieties influence major political decisions and carry implications for policymaking and EU–UK relations moving forward.

By causing a serious gap in the optimistic literature on European integration processes, Brexit has provided numerous challenges for international relations theorists. In this regard, in the present article, three influential theories that best explain Brexit will be discussed: neorealism, constructivism, and the English school of international relations. Notwithstanding that both neorealism and constructivism are able to raise important issues, it seems that there are still certain shortcomings in the two theories in explaining Brexit. Neorealism relies too much on macro-analysis and material factors, and, on the other hand, constructivism tries to account for essential factors from the domestic or secondlevel analysis. Therefore, the paper's central question is how does the English School provide a convincing explanatory framework for understanding Brexit? In response to the question, the paper adopts a theoretical perspective to analyze and explain both the micro-level and macro-level of the Brexit phenomenon by utilizing the English School’, s central assumptions: institutions, the great power status, pluralist-solidarist debate, and the balance of power. It is concluded that English School is able to explain Brexit more satisfactorily. According to the school’, s assumptions, Brexit is not an oddity, but a natural consequence of internal and external equations in the United Kingdom.