The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
The headline of one tabloid screamed "Brexit back on course". The polite reception in Brussels - and Dublin - for the UK's latest Brexit paper on the "backstop", prompted by relief that at last they had something to talk about, led some optimists in London to the view that a robust UK had pulled one over on Brussels. Dream on. When Brexit secretary David Davis meets the EU's chief negotiator Michel Barnier on Monday morning for the next talks round, he will find that the gloves have come off. And he will be rapidly disabused of the hope that all the UK had to do to win brownie points for effort at the end of June summit was to demonstrate a plausible willingness to address the backstop issue. No-one really expected them to resolve the issue, they believe. That hurdle passed, the summer would allow them to engage in chasing the real prize, a comprehensive EU-UK agreement on their future relationship that would make the politically embarrassing backstop agreement redundant. It is only there, after all, to provide a guaranteed fallback should no other deal be done. Not so. Barnier on Friday made clear that that strategy would not wash. For a start the UK document paper can not be described as a plausible attempt at addressing the issue. Politely, he demolished it brick by brick. Crucially, he explained, member states were prepared to make an exceptional case of the North, waving common EU rules and practises for the first and last time, to preserve the frictionless Border and the Belfast Agreement. Such privileges were not on offer to the rest of the UK by virtue, not of malice, but its decision to leave the union. To imagine you could simply extend the backstop provisions UK-wide was presumptuous nonsense. The British paper's failure to even discuss the EU-UK regulatory alignment that would be essential to any border-control-free regime is bizarre. As is its attempt to equate an "expectation" of a time limitation to the backstop with a specific commitment to one - as Barnier pointed out a time-limited backstop is no backstop, no guarantee.
The polite reception in Brussels - and Dublin - for the UK's latest Brexit paper on the "backstop", prompted by relief that at last they had something to talk about, led some optimists in London to the view that a robust UK had pulled one over on Brussels.
Dream on.
When Brexit secretary David Davis meets the EU's chief negotiator Michel Barnier on Monday morning for the next talks round, he will find that the gloves have come off.
And he will be rapidly disabused of the hope that all the UK had to do to win brownie points for effort at the end of June summit was to demonstrate a plausible willingness to address the backstop issue.
No-one really expected them to resolve the issue, they believe. That hurdle passed, the summer would allow them to engage in chasing the real prize, a comprehensive EU-UK agreement on their future relationship that would make the politically embarrassing backstop agreement redundant. It is only there, after all, to provide a guaranteed fallback should no other deal be done.
Not so.
Barnier on Friday made clear that that strategy would not wash. For a start the UK document paper can not be described as a plausible attempt at addressing the issue. Politely, he demolished it brick by brick.
Crucially, he explained, member states were prepared to make an exceptional case of the North, waving common EU rules and practises for the first and last time, to preserve the frictionless Border and the Belfast Agreement. Such privileges were not on offer to the rest of the UK by virtue, not of malice, but its decision to leave the union. To imagine you could simply extend the backstop provisions UK-wide was presumptuous nonsense.
The British paper's failure to even discuss the EU-UK regulatory alignment that would be essential to any border-control-free regime is bizarre. As is its attempt to equate an "expectation" of a time limitation to the backstop with a specific commitment to one - as Barnier pointed out a time-limited backstop is no backstop, no guarantee.
The utter chaos that exists even within the Cabinet, let alone the Parliamentary Conservative party, is such that there is simply no version of brexit available that Theresa May could get her party to agree which might possibly satisfy the EU.
Boris, for all his BS, represents a loud minority across the country who really believe that we should go in, bang on tables, demand the impossible and flounce out when we don't get it. That is more or less the position of Jacob Rees-Mogg's European "Research" Group.
We are staring at the choice of no deal or no brexit. keep to the Fen Causeway
If I have been mildly surprised by developments since, it has been by the absolute calm, competence, and unanimity on the EU side. There should have been loads of potential differences for the UK to exploit. I am not an admirer of Fine Gael, and believe that if they could find a way to sell out, they would. But so far even Varadker and Coveney have been models of a calm determination not to allow the Brexiteers drive a coach-and-four through the uneasy settlement in the North. The EU's unanimous and strong-minded support for us in that is admirable.
Of course it is still quite likely for the whole thing thing to seriously off the rails from everyone's point of view, and that is most likely the outcome if the Brexiteers take over. Varadker and co. will take a lot of domestic heat if that happens because the damage to our economy will be considerable. But so far they have held their nerve.
Either May calls the DUP's bluff and risks a general election, or we are heading for a no substantial deal scenario. We will see how strong the Conservatives affections are for the DUP in due course. Index of Frank's Diaries
Rather, as things approach the wire and we begin the final winding down, rather than allowing a "no deal" to be the only hand on deck, it is far more likely that remainers in all parties, who form a handy majority in both houses, will come together to agree a "leave-lite" agenda that both acknowledges the referendum vote but which also answers all the red lines of the EU.
Yes, this may trigger a Constitutional crisis and would certainly trigger a General Election, but I think, at that point, even conservative leavers will have decided that national interest trumps Party. A calculation that would baffle members of the ERG who seem to venerate self-interest above all else. keep to the Fen Causeway
If she loses a confidence vote when the Commons comes back she will call a general election in the Autumn on the terms of whatever deal she has negotiated. You could then have the weird situation where half the Tories campaign against her and most of Labour and the Lib Dems campaign for her deal.
The thing I don't get is why everyone in the UK seems to accept that a trade deal won't be negotiated until after Brexit. A Brexit deal requires a qualified majority in the Council. A Trade deal afterwards requires unanimity and may never be agreed if there is bad blood when the UK leaves. Index of Frank's Diaries
Barnier has been adamant about keeping Tories on schedule. Tusk on behalf of the Council has been adamant on the point since May mailed the A50. The EP has been adamant on the point since May mailed the A50. The "sufficient progress" reports made clear, right up to 19 March [!] and 6 June 2018: The Tories' cannot follow the simplest instructions.
With them, it's always exception to the rule, cart before the horse, pride before the fall. Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
After all, if you can't even get agreement on the most nebulous of details without risking a vote of no confidence, then the tedious but complicated detail of a trade deal exists in a galaxy far beyond the compehension of the Tory "mind". keep to the Fen Causeway
Also, ME potentates would love to buy weapons from us at even more advantageious prices than currently. keep to the Fen Causeway
The apple does not fall far from the tree. "the Articles primarily addresses adjudication and severability of commerce and piracy sanctioned by any one state rather than 'the united States in congress assembled'." Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
Trump is actually unusual in that he actually takes an interest, although he usually gets his facts wrong. As US firms are the biggest beneficiaries from trade liberalisation, he should be careful which can of worms he opens. The EU response has, to date, been muted, but there are an awful lot of large US multinationals operating in Europe who could be badly hit by an on-line sales tax, a Tobin tax, and various import duties. Index of Frank's Diaries
Right now, the politicians are incapable of giving even the most vague of outlines, so no negotiation is possible. keep to the Fen Causeway
Sooner or later the UK will then be presented with a "take it or leave it" draft of over 1,000 pages of such complexity poor Boris and David won't even be able to read it. They will be relying to the tabloids to explain it to them in words of one syllable, and then reject it all in a huff because because without having any alternative. Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 16
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 10
by gmoke - Feb 13 1 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 6 5 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 28 15 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 24 14 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 31 3 comments
by gmoke - Jan 29
by Oui - Feb 191 comment
by Oui - Feb 19
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 18
by Oui - Feb 18
by Oui - Feb 171 comment
by Oui - Feb 1610 comments
by Oui - Feb 168 comments
by Oui - Feb 15
by Oui - Feb 143 comments
by Oui - Feb 144 comments
by gmoke - Feb 131 comment
by Oui - Feb 132 comments
by Oui - Feb 134 comments
by Oui - Feb 126 comments
by Oui - Feb 115 comments
by Oui - Feb 11
by Oui - Feb 9