Editor's note: Professor Thom Brooks is dean of Durham Law School at Durham University. The article reflects the author's opinion, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

With only days left until the scheduled Brexit date, how the UK is going to exit the EU is still mired in a fog of uncertainty.

Britain's current Brexit chaos is a problem of its own making. When the referendum result was announced, then prime minister David Cameron announced his departure from office, opening up a swift confirmation of Theresa May as his successor. What is notable about this is neither Cameron nor May wanted Brexit. 

Their Tory MP colleagues who did campaign for it – alongside controversial former UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage – all promptly quit their leadership positions. This left non-campaigners to deliver on the promises of those who jumped ship as soon as their side had won. They have also tried to escape any responsibility for the mess they caused.

A significant problem was the complex web of reasons for why people vote for leaving. This was an election without any manifesto, only promises that changed with the audiences they were trying to win over. This overpromising mixed with all key Brexit figures fleeing the scene upon victory is part of the reason for the chaos we see now.

In trying to win over her colleagues who supported withdrawal unlike her, May quickly moved to reassure them over Brexit by throwing her full support for a rapid move to starting it. Her focus then as now was her own party. The prime minister has never engaged in any meaningful way yet with any other party. This failure to reach out across Parliament early could have saved her immense headaches later on when she needed their votes. 

If invited to join a Brexit negotiating team across party lines, some parties might decline but then could be criticized for their failure to get the results they wanted by avoiding responsibility. But in May's refusal to listen to opponents, only she can be blamed for her inability to get an unpopular deal passed.

A further, more serious mistake was triggering Article 50 starting the two-year timeframe before a clear vision for what was to be achieved by Brexit was formulated. The government came to talks with overlapping thick red lines leaving little room for maneuver. This lack of flexibility and absence of a future vision has badly undermined the government's ability to win concessions and move talks forward.

One illustration is immigration. The prime minister has repeatedly reminded the public that Brexit means better control over the UK's borders. It is true that immigration was a top concern of voters at that time and greater restrictions was a popular view. However, May had given little thought to the impact on Northern Ireland which benefits from a Good Friday Agreement with the Republic of Ireland guaranteeing an open border. 

This border has become the main sticking point in talks and it is little wonder. How can the prime minister deliver stricter border controls for the UK while maintaining an open border into the UK with what will become a third part country post-Brexit? An example of being unable to have your cake and eat it.

The recent move by the EU to accept a possible extension is not a first break in the EU's tightly controlled solidarity on Brexit talks. Instead, the EU has worked hard to look the fair, open-minded partner throughout. No doubt the EU has won the global public relations battle.

But any such extension at present merely kicks the can down the road. May has been unwilling to change anything – and lacks a Plan B. There has been no other deal to offer or consider offering. This is either a failure of imagination, negotiating skills or most likely both.

It now seems likely the UK will move towards either a very soft Brexit or run a referendum leading to remaining in the EU for the short-term. The great majority now support "Remain choice" after they have seen the difficulties in delivering on the promises made during the referendum.

While these events are not a positive time for British democracy, it remains to be seen what reforms are ushered in once this issue is addressed to improve things for the better.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)