Theresa May: Leadership in the Shadow of Brexit

Theresa May’s tenure as Prime Minister, though often remembered for its failures and frustrations, reveals a more complex narrative of political resilience, one marked by challenges that would test even the most adept of leaders. May’s time in office, amidst the turbulence of Brexit and rising divisions within her own party, reflects both the limitations of her leadership style and a quiet tenacity that—though overlooked in the shadow of her successors—has earned her a legacy as a fundamentally principled, if beleaguered, leader.

To understand May’s leadership, one must first appreciate the maelstrom into which she stepped in July 2016. In the immediate aftermath of the Brexit referendum, Britain found itself polarized and uncertain. The decision to leave the European Union had unearthed profound rifts across the nation—social, economic, and political—that required delicate navigation. Unlike the Brexit crusaders who would come to dominate the conversation, May had not campaigned to leave the EU; she was a Remainer, though an unenthusiastic one, who approached Brexit not as an ideological mission but as a democratic mandate she felt duty-bound to deliver. Her instinct was always one of duty over personal ambition, a guiding principle that would ultimately prove to be both her greatest asset and her most significant obstacle.

May’s book, The Abuse of Power: Confronting Injustice in Public Life, published after her resignation, sheds light on the convictions that motivated her as Prime Minister. In it, she critiques the failings she observed in government and public institutions, exposing the ways in which power can be manipulated at the expense of ordinary citizens. Her reflections reveal a commitment to accountability and transparency, principles that underpinned her cautious, often understated approach to leadership. Yet, as May would discover, these principles would not suffice in the fractious political landscape of post-referendum Britain.

May’s premiership was characterized by a relentless pressure from within her party, particularly from the European Research Group (ERG), a faction of staunchly Eurosceptic MPs led by Jacob Rees-Mogg. The ERG, with its uncompromising vision of Brexit, became a constant thorn in May’s side. Rees-Mogg, with his antiquated charm and staunch ideological position, was not merely a critic but a powerful disruptor, relentlessly advocating for a Brexit that adhered to the purest interpretation of sovereignty, regardless of the practical repercussions. This factional divide within her own party forced May into a Sisyphean task of negotiating not only with the European Union but with the uncompromising elements of her own government, who saw compromise as betrayal.

Alongside Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson emerged as a formidable presence, rallying support from within the party and among the public with his charismatic, if populist, approach to Brexit. Unlike May, Johnson possessed the flamboyant populist flair that allowed him to simplify the complex realities of Brexit into catchy slogans and grandiose promises. While May’s temperament was one of restraint and caution, Johnson’s was unabashedly theatrical—a dichotomy that worked to Johnson’s advantage in the eyes of a public increasingly disillusioned with what they saw as the dithering indecision of May’s government. May, however, had a more intimate understanding of the economic implications of Brexit and sought a balanced approach that would protect Britain’s vital trade relationships, maintain a soft border in Northern Ireland, and provide continuity in an uncertain time. Her efforts to secure a withdrawal agreement that achieved these goals were branded as capitulations by the Brexiteers, who pushed for a “hard Brexit” that would sever all ties with the EU.

The Brexit negotiations proved arduous, not least due to May’s lack of support from the very cabinet she had inherited. She faced constant dissent from those in her inner circle, which only intensified after the snap general election of 2017, a gamble that dramatically backfired. Intended to strengthen her mandate, the election instead left the Conservative Party in a weakened position, dependent on the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) for support. This alliance would later compound the challenges May faced in negotiating a Brexit deal acceptable to all, as the DUP’s intransigence on issues relating to the Northern Ireland backstop made her attempts to secure a compromise all but impossible.

In The Abuse of Power, May reflects on this tumultuous period, noting the frequent disconnect between political leadership and public interest, a theme that reverberates throughout her analysis of her own tenure. She recognized, perhaps too late, that her measured approach could not compete with the zeal of her more bombastic colleagues. Yet, it is this same sense of duty—what May describes as a commitment to public service—that underpinned her leadership style, even as it became clear that her position was untenable.

Indeed, May’s leadership style often worked against her. She was famously reserved, described by those who worked closely with her as inscrutable and cautious. Her reluctance to build alliances within her party and her stoic, sometimes aloof demeanor isolated her at a time when political capital and charisma were paramount. This image, further damaged by a series of public relations missteps, rendered her an easy target for her party’s right-wing faction, who seized upon her every perceived miscalculation as proof of her lack of conviction. Yet, in the cold light of hindsight, May’s determination to govern with an eye toward stability and integrity—despite intense pressures—stands in stark contrast to the tumultuous populism that would succeed her.

In her final days as Prime Minister, May’s defiance was tempered by resignation; her tears upon leaving office were, perhaps, the only public display of emotion she permitted herself during her premiership. Her legacy is a bittersweet one: while her name may be associated with failed Brexit negotiations, her approach to governance, deeply informed by her own moral convictions, reflects an era of political service defined not by personal gain but by a steadfast—if flawed—commitment to public duty. In The Abuse of Power, she offers a searing critique of political machinations, an implicit acknowledgment of the forces that had derailed her own leadership.

Theresa May’s premiership may not be remembered as one of triumph, yet her legacy as a leader willing to withstand unrelenting opposition in the name of duty endures. Her tenure serves as both a cautionary tale and a quiet testament to the importance of principled governance in an era increasingly defined by partisanship and populist rhetoric. May’s story, though replete with missteps, is ultimately that of a leader who, despite monumental challenges, never wavered in her commitment to the nation, for better or for worse.

Version française:

Le passage de Theresa May à Downing Street est souvent évoqué comme une période de turbulences et d’échecs, mais une analyse plus nuancée révèle le portrait d’une dirigeante confrontée à des défis d’une rare complexité, où les principes et le sens du devoir priment malgré des circonstances adverses. Nommée Première ministre en 2016, dans la foulée du référendum sur le Brexit, Theresa May hérite d’une nation profondément divisée. Contrairement aux ardents défenseurs du « Leave », elle n’avait pas fait campagne pour le Brexit, préférant une ligne modérée, motivée par le respect de la démocratie et le souci de préserver les équilibres socio-économiques du pays. Cette prudence, malgré ses qualités, allait cependant s’avérer un obstacle face aux factions les plus radicales de son propre parti.

Theresa May, dans son livre The Abuse of Power: Confronting Injustice in Public Life, partage des réflexions éclairantes sur son expérience au pouvoir. Elle y critique les abus qu’elle a pu observer au sein des institutions publiques, appelant à davantage de transparence et de responsabilité. Cet ouvrage, imprégné de principes éthiques, permet de mieux saisir le tempérament de May : une femme de convictions, guidée par le devoir plus que par l’ambition personnelle. Pourtant, ce sens du devoir n’a pu contenir l’élan des partisans d’un « Brexit pur et dur », menés par des figures telles que Jacob Rees-Mogg et Boris Johnson. Cette faction, regroupée autour du European Research Group (ERG), défendait une vision inflexible du Brexit, refusant tout compromis et rejetant tout accord qui maintiendrait un lien avec l’Union européenne.

Rees-Mogg, avec son style suranné mais affûté, incarnait cette opposition intraitable, usant de tous les leviers possibles pour contrer les efforts de May en faveur d’une sortie ordonnée de l’UE. De son côté, Boris Johnson, charismatique et adepte des slogans percutants, profitait de la lassitude publique et se positionnait comme le héraut d’un Brexit sans concessions. Là où May tentait de ménager les intérêts économiques du Royaume-Uni et d’éviter un retour des tensions en Irlande du Nord, Johnson simplifiait la réalité avec un populisme efficace, sapant les efforts de la Première ministre pour construire un consensus.

En 2017, May décide de convoquer des élections anticipées dans l’espoir de renforcer son mandat. Mais ce pari se retourne contre elle, affaiblissant son gouvernement et la rendant dépendante du parti unioniste d’Irlande du Nord (DUP), ce qui compliquera encore ses négociations sur le « backstop » irlandais. Chaque compromis envisagé devenait un point de discorde avec son propre parti, et cette absence de soutien interne finit par rendre sa position intenable. Dans son ouvrage, May décrit avec lucidité les dynamiques de pouvoir qui minent souvent l’intérêt public, une critique qui résonne douloureusement avec les batailles intestines qu’elle a vécues au sein des conservateurs.

Theresa May, souvent perçue comme réservée, était décrite par ses proches comme prudente et difficile à cerner, des traits qui, bien que marqués par l’intégrité, l’isolaient dans un moment où le charisme et les alliances étaient vitaux. Les erreurs de communication et son incapacité à inspirer une vision claire de l’avenir du Royaume-Uni ont facilité la tâche de ses détracteurs, qui ne manquaient aucune occasion de remettre en cause sa légitimité. Pourtant, cette ténacité, cet engagement envers une gouvernance honnête, forment le socle de sa vision politique, en contraste frappant avec le populisme de son successeur.

Lorsque Theresa May quitte ses fonctions, ce sont les larmes aux yeux qu’elle s’adresse à la nation, marquant enfin une brèche dans cette réserve qui l’avait si longtemps définie. Son héritage est ambigu : si son nom reste lié aux négociations difficiles du Brexit, son passage au pouvoir témoigne d’une éthique de service public qui, bien que discrète, résonne comme une leçon de probité dans un climat politique de plus en plus polarisé. Dans The Abuse of Power, elle dresse un portrait sévère des dérives politiques, un plaidoyer pour un exercice du pouvoir en phase avec l’intérêt général.

Theresa May ne restera pas dans l’histoire comme une Première ministre triomphante, mais son parcours révèle une dignité et un sens du devoir inébranlable face à des forces qui cherchaient à la déstabiliser. Son passage à Downing Street est un rappel des défis d’une gouvernance fondée sur des principes, à une époque où la démagogie l’emporte trop souvent sur la vérité. May, malgré ses échecs, incarne l’idée d’un leadership résilient, bien que mis à l’épreuve, qui laisse une empreinte indélébile dans une période de l’histoire britannique marquée par les tumultes et les divisions.

Eric Lambert - 30/10/2024