A “stark choice” is how the New York Times is characterizing the decision Britain’s parliament will have to make now that proposed terms have been struck for its departure from the European Union. The option is, on the one hand, Prime Minister May’s deal — half-in, half-out of Europe — or, on the other hand, what the Times calls “a chaotic exit without any deal.”

We’d take the “chaotic exit” in a New York minute. It’s not just that a “hard Brexit” has the virtue of chaos (we can still remember George Gilder beginning a talk to European economists by crying, “equilibrium is death!”). It’s also that it would be an “exit.” That is what animated Britons to vote for Brexit in the first place. Prime Minister May’s option would leave Britain subject to European rules but without a say in their formation.

George III, you old rascal, call your office. Even the mad king would have a hard time presenting a deal in haughtier fashion than that employed by Mrs. May and the EU27 — meaning Europe minus Britain — after the agreement was struck Sunday at Brussels. “This is the only deal possible,” warned the president of the European Commission, His Majesty Jean-Claude Juncker of Luxembourg.

Nikkei’s Financial Times in London reckons the “carefully choreographed” summit in Brussels was “intended to convey the message” that if British members of Parliament reject the deal, there will be “no viable alternative, and the result could be chaos.” It would, the FT quotes Mrs. May as saying, “open the door to yet more division and uncertainty.”

Then again, too, the draft withdrawal treaty runs to 585 pages. It’s a continental roach motel. It struck us that the most important figures in Brussels — President Macron and Chancellor Merkel — were oddly subdued. Frau Merkel, of course, is a lame duck, having declared, after reversals at the polls, that she won’t stand again. Monsieur Macron has his hands full with tax riots in the heart of Paris.

President Trump seems to be savoring the ironies. He twittered over the weekend on the French riots, utzing Mr. Macron (or “Micron,” as he is sometimes called by commenters in the FT) over bilateral trade issues with America. Mr. Macron is such a Europhile that when he won the French presidency he demurred from playing the Marseillaise and opted instead for the European anthem.

In the case of Britain, there are things Mr. Trump could do. Britain has been hoping for an exemplary trade deal with America. British officials partial to remaining in Europe have been belittling this hope as a “pipe dream,” as it was put the other day in a Bloomberg dispatch. So this would be a good time for America to make clear that we will be there for Britain if it votes for independence.

That is, if parliament holds out for a hard Brexit and a truly independent Britain. Gone then would be the concern that in negotiating with Britain we’d really be negotiating with Europe. We’d be dealing with the true Britain and the spirit of the Jay Treaty would logically move to the fore. We’ve been saying since the 1980s that this could illuminate the promise of a broader bloc based on the ideas of British and American liberty.