Krdytkyu

Why did the United Kingdom invoke Article 50 before it had reached a negotiation position? Two years is a short time to negotiate something as complex as a withdrawal from the European Union, yet the UK Government did not agree with itself on a negotiation position until 16 months after it triggered Article 50. A brief timeline of Brexit:

• 23 June 2016, the United Kingdom votes to leave the European Union
  


• 29 March 2017, the United Kingdom invokes Article 50
  


• 12 July 2018, the Government publishes its negotiation position, known as the Chequers plan
  


• 14 November 2018, The United Kingdom and the European Union negotiators reach a draft withdrawal agreement
  


• (16 December 2018: date of this question)


• 29 March 2019: The United Kingdom is scheduled to leave the European Union

I don't understand the timing of invoking Article 50. Why didn't the UK wait until it knew what it wanted?

Negotiating for Brexit was the job of the executive wing of the UK government, which means the Cabinet, led by the Prime Minister.

The UK negotiating policy for Brexit set out what the government wanted.

The problem now is that the government got very little of what it wanted. The argument within the UK now is about whether what it got is better than what it has now, or what it would have if it left without any agreement.

Theresa May knows that she needs something more to get the deal through Parliament, but there is no consensus on what one or two things it should push for, and what it might be prepared to give up in return. This leads to the vagueness that the EU is complaining about.

The problem with arriving at a negotiating position was that the Conservative Party has never had a single view of what was wrong with the UK's position within the EU. There are factions ranging from "It's just fine as it is" to "Hard Brexit immediately."

For many of the Conservatives in favour of exit, their position was about the leaving, not the end result, for which they didn't have a plan. They weren't expecting to win the referendum, and weren't prepared for it. Some of them may not have really wanted to win, since campaigning is much easier than implementation.

This meant that arriving at a negotiating position involved a large number of compromises, taking time and producing only vagueness. Worse, the position was not backed by large sections of the party, producing the current factionalism, and lack of ability to get the current deal through Parliament.

The "Hard Brexit Now!" group are the only people who have a robust plan, which is to prevent anything else happening until the UK crashes out by default. Sadly, they are unlikely to suffer any of the consequences of this. They'll leave that job to the population.

Essentially, the goal was to leave the European Union and all of the horrible problems that EU membership entailed. Invoking Article 50 provided a means to do that, and a (relatively) fixed deadline.

If there is no deal, the goal is still reached. A little chaos in the interim before things settle down isn't a dealbreaker - the goal is still achieved.