As David Cameron exits politics, what legacy does he leave behind?
Britain's former prime minister stepped down from his seat in Parliament on Monday, only weeks after leaving the United Kingdom's top job.
Britain's outgoing Prime Minister David Cameron, with his wife Samantha, waves in front of number 10 Downing Street, on his last day in office as Prime Minister, in central London, Britain on July 13, 2016.
Stefan Wermuth/Reuters/File
David Cameron, Britain鈥檚 former prime minister, announced Monday he was resigning his seat in Parliament, thereby leaving the British political establishment.
The announcement comes only weeks after his resignation from the top job in the wake of the country鈥檚 vote to leave the European Union (EU), which he had campaigned against. It is a surprise to many, after he had stated he would remain in his position as Member of Parliament (MP) until the next elections, in 2020.
Indeed, there has been widespread speculation in British media as to the motives that may lie behind Mr. Cameron鈥檚 decision, coupled with consideration of what his legacy will be. In this, there seems to be near-universal agreement on one thing that will forever be tied to him and his premiership: the Brexit.
鈥淲ith the circumstances of my resignation, it isn鈥檛 really possible to be a proper backbench MP as a former prime minister,鈥� Cameron told the BBC. 鈥淚 think everything you do will become a big distraction, and from what the government needs to do for our country.鈥�
Many analysts were quick to agree that the politician has a point: Having headed the 鈥淩emain鈥� campaign during Britain鈥檚 referendum on whether to leave the EU, it would have been challenging for Cameron to find a constructive way of participating in national politics as the Brexit preparations gets underway.听
Yet some observers have postulated other factors propelling Cameron from public office.
鈥淭he bigger truth is that Cameron is going because he and reputation on winning the European referendum 鈥� and lost,鈥� writes The Guardian鈥檚 Martin Kettle. 鈥淗e thought he could win the referendum on the back of his own communication skills and without building up the pro-European case in his party and in the country in his decade as leader of a largely anti-European party.鈥�
In this, as in many aspects of Cameron鈥檚 time in charge of Britain, some observers see a lack of real drive and conviction: that even though he had many laudable ideas and policies, in execution there was often insufficient passion to really make them stick 鈥撎齟ither in practice, or in the psyche of the British people.
鈥淗e was not, overall, a bad prime minister. In fact, he was often ,鈥� writes The Telegraph鈥檚 executive editor for politics, James Kirkup. But, he continues, there was no underlying philosophy or world outlook that seemed to drive Cameron's actions, and his 鈥渂est ideas were never driven home with real force.鈥�
While Cameron鈥檚 time in office certainly produced worthy achievements 鈥� not least in the realms of employment, inequality, and crime, as well as a second-term majority won against all expectations 鈥� it is his country鈥檚 departure from the continental club of countries that will be remembered.
鈥淲hen students write about Cameron in the year 2066, they won鈥檛 be answering questions about intervention in Libya, or gay marriage,鈥� wrote Dominic Sandbrook in the New Statesman. 鈥淭hey will be writing about .鈥�
This report includes material from Reuters and the Associated Press.