Whose Brexit? How the EU, British and Irish Executives Framed the Brexit Crisis

Brexit - the decision of the United Kingdom (UK) to leave the European Union (EU) – constitutes an unprecedented crisis of the EU and its member states. It shatters its normative basis by calling (even more) into question the legitimacy of supranational governance. Brexit is characterized by a high degree of uncertainty and constitutes a case without precedent which could become a reference point amidst ongoing discussions regarding the democratic deficit of the EU. In such critical times, political leaders are under pressure to find solutions that best serve the interests of those they represent. At the same time, however, crises present opportunities to break up political deadlocks and pave the way for reform and progress. Against this background, the paper explores how Brexit was framed in political speeches. We do so for the EU level (Commissioners and President of the European Council), but also for the members of the UK and the Irish government as two countries which are facing the most of both direct and indirect effects of Brexit. Theoretically, we embed our analysis in Historical Institutionalism, interpreting Brexit as a critical juncture. In addition, we refer to the framing literature and explore differences between our cases relying on structural topic modelling. Analysing a time frame of 2016-January 2020, we cover the period before the referendum took place, Brexit negotiations, and the eventually planned exit in early 2020. The paper adds to the academic discussion about Brexit which has so far mostly focused on individual level motivations as explanations of the referendum result. Our results are discussed with reference to the debate about the EU’s democratic deficit.