UK Office of the European Union can help to avoid the conflict between Russia and NATO, he wrote in an article for The Washington Post chief editor of the magazine The Nation Christine van den Heyvel.
According to her, after a shocked all British referendum results to the political establishment on both sides of the Atlantic, finally dawning on too long they have been unable to provide any common prosperity, nor security, ignoring the needy majority too long, working in favor of those who already succeeded.
"British referendum should force the EU and the United States is fundamentally revise its policies - including with regard to austerity, government technocrats, migration, and economic and foreign policy", - says van den Heyvel.
In her view, this reassessment should touch and NATO policy towards Russia.
What is happening between the military alliance and Moscow in recent years - a "dangerous slope" a new Cold War, which, from the point of view of the author, given "shamefully little impact."
Speaking about the danger of a possible conflict, she quoted former US Defense Secretary William Perry, who said earlier this year that the risk of a nuclear catastrophe is now much higher than during the Cold War.
Indeed, US-Russian relations have deteriorated sharply in the last few years, the journalist recalls. In the Western media of the first echelon Russia positioned as "the only aggressor," without saying a word about the role of the EU and NATO in the Ukrainian crisis and the rise in tensions.
Van Den Heyvel recalls some of the concrete steps the US and its NATO allies over the past few years: against Russia imposed sanctions, Romania launched a missile defense system, dramatically increased the number of armed forces on the border with Russia, and began to carry out more large-scale military exercises - for example, in recent maneuvers "Ankonda-2016" attended by more than 30 thousand soldiers.
It is not surprising that Moscow should respond to this by pulling more troops to its western borders. Thus, the risk of a possible "incident, miscalculation and escalation" became even higher.
The journalist recalls that such a large number of hostile forces was not on NATO's borders since the Second World War. And it is expected that at the NATO summit to be held in Warsaw next month, this "increasingly hostile and dangerous policy" will be officially approved.
In Ukraine, while continuing crisis: according to van den Heyvel, French and German authorities either could not or did not force the Ukrainian government to adhere to "shaky Minsk agreements" that were supposed to put an end to the civil war. "If Ukraine and have any chance of recovery, it will need the support and the part of Russia and the West", - she said.
With regard to cooperation on Syria, then there is the United States for the most part refused to cooperate with Russia in the fight against "Islamic state" (an organization banned in Russia - Ed.), But continued to arm the rebels, hoping to topple the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, who supported Moscow.
"Brexit, which at least will make the European Union and the UK to focus on domestic issues, can lead to a fundamental reassessment of the course" - said van den Heyvel.
She drew attention to the fact that Europe is growing resistance to the anti-Russian rhetoric, the West. Italy and France, for example, dissatisfied with the costs of sanctions.
In turn, the German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier expressed his dissatisfaction with the NATO exercises near the border with Russia, saying that the military alliance should not aggravate the situation, "saber-rattling and war cries."
The US and NATO have good reasons to cooperate with Russia, says journalist: only joint efforts can try to win the IG, to promote peace talks in Syria to resume negotiations on nuclear disarmament.
While all comments about Brexit were associated mainly with potentially devastating political and economic consequences of such a decision for the UK and EU, as well as the ignorance of those who voted for secession from the EU and now regrets it.
Those who commented on the foreign policy consequences of Brexit, stated on such implications, as a possible weakening of NATO and the role of Russia in a divided Europe.
"Which would be ironic if the voters have forced the EU to weaken its destructive mode acute economy, to give impetus to the settlement of the conflict in Syria through negotiations and force NATO to revise its more reckless approach towards Russia. If anything happened, the British voters consciously or not, would have rendered us a great service, "- sums up the van den Heyvel.