Sitting in Brussels or in one of the EU’s 27 chancelleries, it’s easy to tune out the latest Conservative party drama in Britain. After all, the country now has a new Labour prime minister who is pro-European and eager to build on the “reset” started by Keir Starmer. Why care what an opposition party thinks when it’s still reeling from its landslide defeat in 2024, stuck in third place in the polls, and losing support on its right flank? It’s tempting to dismiss Kemi Badenoch and her party as a sideshow.
But that would be a mistake. With her latest statements, Badenoch has effectively committed the Conservatives to a policy of conflict—and possibly even rupture—with the EU. She recently wrote in a newspaper article that anyone who opposes her plan to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) or abandon net-zero commitments would be considered “not serious” and therefore barred from being a Conservative candidate in the next election. She then withdrew the party whip (a UK parliamentary term for “kicked out”) from Gavin Barwell, a member of the House of Lords who criticized her stance. This move echoes Boris Johnson’s purge of pro-Europeans from the party.
Westminster has mostly seen this through a domestic lens: a Tory leader willing to ditch centre-right supporters to prevent further defections to Reform UK on the right. What’s been overlooked is the European angle. If the Conservatives were to return to power—which polls suggest could happen in alliance with Reform UK—Badenoch’s ideological red lines would revive the ghost of a “no deal” Brexit.
That’s because the UK’s continued membership in the ECHR underpins every part of its post-Brexit relationship with the EU. For example, Article 763 of the 2021 Trade and Cooperation Agreement commits both sides to shared values, including the human rights treaties they’ve signed. Article 771 makes clear that this commitment is essential to the deal, and Article 772 states that if either side breaks this promise, the other can suspend or terminate the agreement.
The EU insisted on these references mainly to protect peace in Northern Ireland, notes Catherine Barnard, a professor of EU law and fellow at the UK in a Changing Europe think tank. The ECHR is embedded in the Good Friday Agreement, where Britain committed to enshrining convention rights in Northern Irish law. Meanwhile, the Windsor Framework—the deal Rishi Sunak negotiated to ease post-Brexit trade across the Irish Sea while keeping the land border open—specifically commits Britain to “no diminution of rights, safeguards or equality of opportunity” as set out in the Good Friday Agreement.
What’s more, ECHR membership supports many other areas of cooperation, including data sharing and criminal extradition arrangements. Even the Gibraltar agreement, signed just on July 15, requires both sides to remain signatories. A British government that left the convention wouldn’t just be making a small tweak to its human rights system; it would be pulling on a thread that runs through the entire fabric of the post-Brexit relationship.
Conservatives claim the danger is exaggerated—that the EU would never let a dispute over the ECHR blow up an important trading relationship. But that sounds like the same complacency seen throughout the Brexit process. David Wolfson, the shadow attorney general, argued last year that leaving the ECHR wouldn’t breach the Good Friday Agreement because it only requires convention rights to be accessible in domestic courts. Other legal experts, especially in Northern Ireland, disagree. They point out that the ECHR is in the Good Friday Agreement precisely to ensure those rights are protected by a body independent of the British state. The EU’s victory over Hungary in Europe…A European court ruling this year on an anti-LGBTQ+ law showed how seriously it takes fundamental rights. It would be just as vigilant if it decided that a member state’s vital interests were at risk.
Skip past newsletter promotion
Free newsletter | Weekly
Sign up to This is Europe
The most pressing stories and debates for Europeans – from identity to economics to the environment
Preview latest
Enter your email
Sign up
After newsletter promotion
What the EU wants from Andy Burnham
Read more
Nor is Badenoch’s ECHR loyalty test the only problem. Article 772 of the trade and cooperation agreement also says that “an act or omission that materially defeats the object and purpose of the Paris agreement shall always be considered a serious and substantial failure” to meet the “essential obligations” of the deal. Depending on where the Conservative leader’s anti-net zero policy ends up, that could cause serious trouble for the trading relationship. Its rules for a level playing field depend on shared climate goals.
Europeans might roll their eyes and see Badenoch’s grandstanding as more proof that British politics remains, in her own words, “unserious.” But that would be complacent too. As the global order breaks apart and Europeans feel squeezed by an aggressive Russia, a coercive US, and a mercantilist China, the UK-EU relationship has become vital for European security. It’s not enough for Brussels to keep saying it’s up to Britain to decide what relationship it wants. Both sides have a duty to strengthen it before the next UK election.
In fact, Andy Burnham may need all the help he can get. His goodwill hasn’t yet turned into clear European policy, and Starmer’s reset has reached the limit of what’s possible within Labour’s red lines: no return to the single market, the customs union, or free movement. To keep the relationship moving forward, a new project is needed that deepens institutional and political ties without crossing either side’s current red lines. A defence pact – building on existing coalitions of the willing and including Ukraine – is the obvious choice. To put Badenoch’s no-deal ghost to rest, Brussels must do its part to show the relationship’s value.
Simon Nixon is a journalist and economics commentator.
Frequently Asked Questions
Here is a list of FAQs based on the articles premise written in a natural conversational tone with clear answers
FAQs Why Europe Should Care About Kemi Badenoch
1 Who is Kemi Badenoch and why does this article think I should care
Kemi Badenoch is a senior UK politician The article argues that European leaders are ignoring her which is a mistake because she could become the next UK Prime Minister and her views on trade regulation and the EU will directly affect Europe
2 Whats the big mistake the article talks about
The mistake is that European officials and media are dismissing Badenoch as irrelevant or extreme so they arent preparing for her potential policies The article says this is shortsighted because her ideas could reshape UKEurope relations
3 Does the article say nobody in Europe knows who she is
Yes it claims that most European politicians and journalists dont take her seriously or know her positions It calls this a big mistake because they are underestimating her influence
4 What are Kemi Badenochs main opinions that Europe should worry about
According to the article she is a strong Brexit supporter who wants to diverge from EU regulations cut red tape and prioritize free trade deals outside Europe She is also skeptical of EU institutions and the European Court of Human Rights
5 Why would her opinions matter to a regular person in France or Germany
If she becomes PM her policies could make the UK a more competitive lowregulation rival to the EU This could affect trade tariffs data flows and even labor mobility which impacts businesses and jobs across Europe
6 Is this article just about UK politics or does it affect the whole EU
Its about UKEU relations The article argues that ignoring her now means Europe wont be ready for a UK government that might be more confrontational on trade fishing rights and financial services
7 Doesnt the UK have a general election first Isnt she unlikely to win
Yes the next election is likely in 2024 or 2025 The articles point is that European leaders should still study her ideas now because even if she doesnt win her influence on the Conservative Party could shift UK policy
