There was an excellent thread yesterday from Sydney Nash, a former Civil Servant and former UK/EU negotiator, about the way the future UK-EU relationship is likely to develop and how the two sides might be able to live alongside each other. It is not an altogether encouraging read. He looks at four 'fundamentals' by which I take to mean the unchanging (or only slowly changing) things which are going to define the relationship at least for many years.
Here is first tweet:
There are four fundamentals to keep in mind when considering how this relationship might develop:1. All roads lead to the border.This was true at every critical moment during the negotiations & will continue to be the case as the new relationship develops.— Sydney Nash (@NashSGC) March 4, 2021
By 'border' he means the very fact that there will be two regulatory systems and two customs areas and a border between them. In other words it's not just in NI but the entire border around the UK.
The other points he lists are:
2. The only objectives that matter are defending sovereignty (UK) & defending the single market (EU).
3. This govt has no interest in having a good relationship with the EU.
4. Neither side trusts the other.
I don't think his points are contentious and are more a statement of fact. The scope for argument is almost endless and he foresees a sort of permanent state of enmity existing and NI will more often than not be the central issue.
Managing what happens in Northern Ireland is one of the few areas of the UK/EU agreements (beyond broad implementation) where there is shared responsibility. Much of the rest of the relationship is, he says, "set up to be transactional, but the Protocol demands cooperation."
What concerns him, is the appearance at the moment of a vicious circle where "an absence of trust encourages a combative approach, and that combative approach helps undermine trust. And then all that is left is the UK and EU’s contrasting priorities clashing within the crucible of NI."
This is his argument paraphrased and copied:
In the province, many EU rules still apply. This was a price the government was willing to pay in 2019 to break the impasse and an election, but its current actions suggest that it is unhappy with what it agreed. If it comes to the conclusion that the NI protocol is in fact intolerable, because part of the UK remains subject to EU rules, and that it will do what is necessary to address this, it has three option:
(i) Rip up the Withdrawal Agreement & unilaterally erect a border on the island of Ireland
(ii) Allow Northern Ireland to exit the UK
(iii) Renegotiate key elements of the Protocol
Options 1 and 2 come with significant risks, Nash says. I think we can dismiss them altogether since the US will never tolerate the first and the Tories won't tolerate the second. Option 3 is extremely difficult but is by far the most palatable if the government really cannot live with the Protocol as it stands
But if renegotiation is what the government really wants, then it needs to go back to the fundamentals of its relationship with the EU and change the ones that are in its control. Specifically, it must address the lack of trust in the relationship.
Nash says, we can do this, in part, by dialing down the combative approach. Britain can also build trust by doing all it can to implement the Protocol as it stands. Unless the government demonstrates that it wants to make the new arrangements work, not just wreck them, the EU will not trust it.
If the UK does make a real attempt to make the protocol work, then it can justifiably ask that a discussion begin about changing it. And, if sufficient trust has been built up, the EU might be willing, not only to have that conversation, but to take a less absolute view of its priorities if that is what is necessary to create a sustainable framework for future relations.
Ultimately, all roads will continue to lead to the border, and contrasting priorities will always result in the UK and EU clashing on occasion, but it is within the govt’s gift to make the ride we are currently on less bumpy and less dangerous.
I think Nash is right and all of this is true, but the appointment of Lord Frost is a clear signal that we want to continue the combative approach and to be the grit in the oyster for no good reason other than to satisfy the right wing press and their readers. They actually want us to throw our weight around even if it works against our best interests.
Someone else posted a clip of Blair from 2016 explaining the border issue. I was no great fan of Blair when he was PM but on Europe he was right and his (and others like John Major) warnings of the border issue has turned out to be absolutely prescient:
Five years later and this is still not a small point of detail. pic.twitter.com/jHiv5CwCBY
— Steve Analyst (@EmporersNewC) March 4, 2021
The whole thing is spiralling into a state of permanent rancour, argument and bitterness.
I must say there is little sign of the Brexit problems which are stacking up everywhere having an effect of the polling. The idea that Brexit has all been a mistake is still holding a lead but it has certainly narrowed and there is little sign of the big shift in public opinion that I expected.
