EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

The conclusion seems to be:

Since law, medicine and even politics are all based on common sense it would seem to me that the main and urgent issue is to disentangle ourselves as soon as possible from the rules and regulations of the EU. Why would we want to engage and discuss “trade deals”. What trade deals? The EU has taken years and years to negotiate a string of trade deals that are not even that advantageous to the UK. Surely the UK could just start its own trading under other arrangements? As an expert on treaty law, I fail to understand why you need any “trade agreements” to trade? I agree with businessmen like Tim Martin of Wetherspoon and Lord Bamford of Bamford JCB that to trade you just trade.

The idea that we can just leave is obviously true. But her conclusion, from an economic and IR perspective, is obviously nuts. She even notes earlier in the article that:

this could descend into a tariff war

Although she also claims that

it is likely that we would end up with this situation at the end of two years anyway.

But the potential backlash from our closest neighbours is the reason we wouldn't want to do this. A unilateral exit is a bad idea.

She hasn't chanced upon some secret (although she attempts to insinuate she has - there's lots of quasi-conspiracy theory language being used). International law is built upon norms. There is no body which can force a state for failing to meet the obligations of a treaty. But other states can certainly punish a state for not doing so.