Martin Kettle in The Guardian (HERE) writes an interesting article about the choice now facing us. As I have argued on this blog, he concludes that in the UK's internal negotiations there is now little or no prospect of a half-way house that will satisfy both sides. May's deal is an attempt to bridge the divide but it will never succeed because neither side will accept it. We must make a choice between being close to the EU, in which case we may as well be a member, or having a far more distant and far more damaging association.
Kettle thinks the government discussions with Labour are going nowhere and will ultimately fail and with them will go any idea of a soft Brexit:
"The attempt to reconcile Britain’s place in Europe with the leave victory of 2016 within the Brexit process is therefore dead. It was killed by the hardline Brexiteers and by May’s rigidity. We pragmatic pro-Europeans are therefore discharged from our dilemma. The times have changed".
He is essentially saying what Wolfgang Schauble, the German finance minister said in June 2016 (it take us a long time to see the obvious doesn't it?), that we are either IN or OUT. Speaking to Der Spiegel in early June 2016 he said (HERE):
“That won’t work [being out with single market access], it would require the country to abide by the rules of a club from which it currently wants to withdraw. If the majority in Britain opts for Brexit, that would be a decision against the single market. In is in. Out is out. One has to respect the sovereignty of the British people.”
Having worked closely with German people I know how quickly they see the fundamental truth of something. But, three years late I think we are finally getting round to seeing that he was right, the real choice must now be made.
"With the centre option on Brexit collapsing, the decision lies between extremes. We are back to remain or leave, but now in their 2019 versions. The times will inevitably be very divided again. The effective Brexit choice will lie between no deal, promoted by May’s successor and much of the Tory party, and a second vote, hopefully but by no means certainly promoted by Corbyn, and by other parties too. But the choice for pro-Europeans has now been clarified, and no pro-European can doubt where they must stand".
I think Kettle is right. It is either leaving with no deal (unthinkable) or remaining in. These are extremes and I don't believe the government or parliament can or will make that decision, it must go back to the people in another referendum. The stark choice will have big implications for Ireland and trade. It is one we have put off for three years but we must surely face up to it sooner or later.
The Future
If we do anything other than remain, the future is not going to be a happy one.
If May's deal is somehow forced through and reluctantly accepted, the coming talks on trade, security, data transfers, finance and all the other things will go on for years. They will be hard and even more rancorous than before. I am sorry to say they will only expose our weaknesses even more than the Withdrawal Agreement has and they will present the country with yet more problems.
Firstly, the UK itself is in danger of breaking up.
Scotland is moving towards another independence vote and who could blame them. In 2014 they were told it was better to stick with the UK and the EU, that independence would mean leaving the EU. But now it's clear they cannot be in the UK and the EU (HERE). Scotland will have to give up one or the other. Looking at the mind boggling, xenophobic incompetence at Westminster it would be a surprise to me if they did not decide to be an independent nation in the EU.
Likewise, Ireland will surely be unified in the near future. Clinging on to Northern Ireland, or having Unionists there clinging on to us is not sustainable. A border poll, the forerunner to unification cannot be many years away.
The terrible murder of the journalist Lyra McKee in Londonderry has brought more calls for a reconciliation between the Unionists and Nationalists in Northern Ireland.
Secondly, our role at the UN is already being questioned (HERE) with academics suggesting the UK's position as a permanent member of the Security Council could be at risk. Catherine Gegout (Lecturer in International Relations at Nottingham University) tells us China has already said that the UN Security Council needs reform, and it must include an increase in the number of representatives from developing countries, especially African nations. Any reform process would undoubtedly question the legitimacy of the seat of a UK outside of the EU.
Thirdly, we are already seeing the UK acting on the international plane in a weakened state.
The government's decision, leaked from the National Security Council, to allow Huawei technologies from China into our 5G network (HERE), after some of our five-eyes allies decided to ban them is an indicator of our diminished role on the world stage. What possible reason, apart from future trade, is there for allowing a one party communist state to supply our vital communications infrastructure? There must be other western suppliers yet we deliberately pick one from China. Anybody who thinks Huawei is not the Chinese state in disguise really needs a reality check. China has a lamentable human rights record, no independent judiciary and is essentially ruled by one man.
Reuters report the UK is to host economic talks with China in June (HERE). The events are surely linked?
Saudi Arabia mass executed 37 people recently (HERE), including two minors, but our government's response is muted if there is one at all. This follows their security services being recorded murdering a journalist in Turkey, apparently on the orders of Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the head of state. We remain silent because they buy a lot of stuff from us, especially military hardware. We can't afford not to turn a blind eye.
I don't pretend a second vote and a remain victory will be easy decisions or will resolve the European issue, only that it's the best outcome for the United Kingdom.
The government at that time, whoever leads it, will need to work very hard and over a period of years, to sell again the European idea of ever-closer union as it did in 1975 and face down the extremists. At the moment, this might seem hard, even impossible, but pro-EU voices are muted because they believe the majority in this country are anti-EU. I have never thought that. A lot of leave voters don't understand what the EU is or what it does or how it does it.
If there is a second vote and remain wins, pro-EU voices and members of the government will be released from a self-imposed silence and be justified in starting a campaign to explain the reality behind the UK's continued EU membership and why it's beneficial.
And money must be found for the communities who voted leave in 2016 as a protest.
If May's deal is somehow forced through and reluctantly accepted, the coming talks on trade, security, data transfers, finance and all the other things will go on for years. They will be hard and even more rancorous than before. I am sorry to say they will only expose our weaknesses even more than the Withdrawal Agreement has and they will present the country with yet more problems.
Firstly, the UK itself is in danger of breaking up.
Scotland is moving towards another independence vote and who could blame them. In 2014 they were told it was better to stick with the UK and the EU, that independence would mean leaving the EU. But now it's clear they cannot be in the UK and the EU (HERE). Scotland will have to give up one or the other. Looking at the mind boggling, xenophobic incompetence at Westminster it would be a surprise to me if they did not decide to be an independent nation in the EU.
Likewise, Ireland will surely be unified in the near future. Clinging on to Northern Ireland, or having Unionists there clinging on to us is not sustainable. A border poll, the forerunner to unification cannot be many years away.
The terrible murder of the journalist Lyra McKee in Londonderry has brought more calls for a reconciliation between the Unionists and Nationalists in Northern Ireland.
Secondly, our role at the UN is already being questioned (HERE) with academics suggesting the UK's position as a permanent member of the Security Council could be at risk. Catherine Gegout (Lecturer in International Relations at Nottingham University) tells us China has already said that the UN Security Council needs reform, and it must include an increase in the number of representatives from developing countries, especially African nations. Any reform process would undoubtedly question the legitimacy of the seat of a UK outside of the EU.
Thirdly, we are already seeing the UK acting on the international plane in a weakened state.
The government's decision, leaked from the National Security Council, to allow Huawei technologies from China into our 5G network (HERE), after some of our five-eyes allies decided to ban them is an indicator of our diminished role on the world stage. What possible reason, apart from future trade, is there for allowing a one party communist state to supply our vital communications infrastructure? There must be other western suppliers yet we deliberately pick one from China. Anybody who thinks Huawei is not the Chinese state in disguise really needs a reality check. China has a lamentable human rights record, no independent judiciary and is essentially ruled by one man.
Reuters report the UK is to host economic talks with China in June (HERE). The events are surely linked?
Saudi Arabia mass executed 37 people recently (HERE), including two minors, but our government's response is muted if there is one at all. This follows their security services being recorded murdering a journalist in Turkey, apparently on the orders of Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the head of state. We remain silent because they buy a lot of stuff from us, especially military hardware. We can't afford not to turn a blind eye.
I don't pretend a second vote and a remain victory will be easy decisions or will resolve the European issue, only that it's the best outcome for the United Kingdom.
The government at that time, whoever leads it, will need to work very hard and over a period of years, to sell again the European idea of ever-closer union as it did in 1975 and face down the extremists. At the moment, this might seem hard, even impossible, but pro-EU voices are muted because they believe the majority in this country are anti-EU. I have never thought that. A lot of leave voters don't understand what the EU is or what it does or how it does it.
If there is a second vote and remain wins, pro-EU voices and members of the government will be released from a self-imposed silence and be justified in starting a campaign to explain the reality behind the UK's continued EU membership and why it's beneficial.
And money must be found for the communities who voted leave in 2016 as a protest.
