It is unfortunate that the spotlight is in the UK, and that the EU is not able to bring across the benefits and compromises that membership has and implies. I

It is unfortunate that the spotlight is in the UK, and that the EU is not able to bring across the benefits and compromises that membership has and implies. I fear that this failure of communicating clearly to EU citizens (and the rest) what the EU project is, what benefits it has, why we need to compromise in certain areas, is having a strong negative impact in how it is perceived, and can bring about its own demise. For decades the EU bashers have been attributing all kinds of problems to the EU, while very seldom anybody, not even the member states which benefit from membership, have ever taken the chance to praise the role that EU is playing in lots of different areas. May has made her case quite eloquently, offering the UK's view of the negotiations, but of course without recognizing something extremely obvious: whenever May talks about a UK strength, which can and will be used in negotiation, she omits mentioning that the other side, the EU, has a similar strength, often much bigger. And she keeps on pretending that the EU is trying to punish the UK for leaving the block, when nothing is further from the truth. The EU is simply not willing to dilute the value of EU membership by allowing the UK to have "its cake and eat it". May repeats and repeats that there is nothing bad in allowing the UK a very favorable access to the EU common market, but I guess that she does not allow her neighbors to enter at their will into her house: being member of a Club has some benefits, but implies following some rules. Put bluntly: giving access to the common market means the end of the EU. As long as that is not the goal of the EU26, we can not accept that. Finally, the UK has proven to be an extremely unreliable partner, and a very selfish one. After decades of special treatment, the UK is prepared (quite literally, as we see with the threats of becoming a tax heaven) to stab the EU in the back. This, from my point of view, has three consequences: - the UK can not be trusted again to work together with the EU. Any deal we make with the UK must be done taking into account that the UK can and will break it whenever it wishes - there is no rolling back: sorry for the remain voters, but it is unthinkable for us EU citizens to get you back on board. Even in case that your leaders rethink their position, I would say that option is not anymore on the table. Brexit it is. - any other country or economic block making trade agreements with the UK are by now aware of how selfish and unreliable the UK has become. I would say this will have consequences in the kind of deals that the UK will able to secure. May and the brexiteers have been talking for months about trade deals as if those would never carry any kind of compromises attached. Any deal means a compromise, securing something in exchange of something else. You had an agreement with the EU (as EU member) which is being terminated because you did not like the strings attached. You will now get zick new agreements with other areas, all of them with strings attached. Will you blame those agreements for your future failures?