The NI protocol - the only show in town

Johnson has escaped personal responsibility for the escalating violence in Northern Ireland - so far anyway - and many Brexit supporters blame the EU for forcing the NI protocol on Britain. You don’t have to be on Twitter very long to see some tweets putting the blame squarely on Brussels and it’s a narrative that suits the press, many of whom still defend Brexit and see nothing wrong with it. This morning, I noted a tweet from Mujtaba Rahman goes further and claims the British government thinks the problem is one for the EU to resolve:

Here it is:

Amazingly, HMG view on violence in NI is: this is largely a prob for EU to resolve

Reasoning along lines: EU consistently favoured nationalist community in Brexit deal; shd now prioritise needs of unionists = more flex in implementation of Protocol, checks down Irish Sea

— Mujtaba Rahman (@Mij_Europe) April 9, 2021

This sounds exactly the sort of thing Johnson would believe and you can just about see the distorted logic behind it. Violence will put pressure on the Commission to offer some “flexibilities” which would alleviate some of his difficulties, the thinking probably goes. 

In reply someone posted a link to the letter Boris Johnson wrote to President Juncker on 2 October 2019, as pressure was growing to get a deal. Note the third of the 5 points is Johnson’s own proposal for an "all island regulatory zone" which is the basis of the NI protocol.

At that point I do not believe the EU had any notion that the British government was prepared to contemplate any such idea, having heard both Mrs May and Johnson himself (on multiple occasions) say no British prime minister could accept a border in the Irish Sea.

It was that paragraph that showed the EU and Ireland that there had (a) been a big shift in UK government thinking and that (b) the EU's original proposal was back on the table, (c) there was a real prospect of getting an agreement and (d) it was worth reopening the Withdrawal Agreement, something they had refused to do before.

There is no doubt in my mind that this was a key moment. However, it wasn't forced on Johnson by the EU but by Brexit. Time was running out with no sign of movement at all from the EU side and despite all his rhetoric there was (and never could have been) the slightest prospect of the UK leaving without a deal. In other words, he had no choice.  He blinked first and out of it came the NI protocol. But don't let anyone suggest it was anyone other than Johnson who is responsible.

I am not sure the EU will be able to offer sufficient flexibilities to placate the rioters. They may suggest talks and this might buy some time but even the lightest sea border is still a border and for unionists it may not be enough. I think it is the principle they object to.

If the sea border won't work and isn't acceptable to half the population of NI in the long run, it could force Johnson into another U turn and closer regulatory alignment, even membership of the EEA. Instead of facing the wrath of 750,000 protestants he would just face it from perhaps a hundred or so Tory MPs. I am not sure the press would be opposed - especially if the violence looks like it has once again become a permanent feature of NI politics.

Amidst a lot of speculation about who or what is responsible for the rioting, with Brexiteers looking for anything other than Brexit to blame, this short article by Katy Howard is interesting. She is a professor of political sociology at Queen’s University Belfast, and fellow in the Senator George J. Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice. Professor Howard focuses on the post-Brexit status, and future, of Northern Ireland.  Nobody knows more about it than she does.

She asks who is responsible and is in no doubt:

"The truth however is that the recent violence isn’t merely recreational. It’s political. On the streets of Northern Ireland and in the corridors of Stormont, we are seeing the signs of a growing democratic crisis over the application of the Brexit deal between the United Kingdom and the European Union. Officials and politicians in Brussels and London should take note of their responsibility in bringing it to a peaceful end."

It's Brexit, the NI protocol and the Conservative party:

"Beneath it all is the unnerving perception that the so-called Conservative and Unionist government in London prioritized Brexit over the “integrity” of the union, and in so doing was strongly supported by the party’s members. In the deal it negotiated with the Brussels, the U.K. agreed to let Northern Ireland be an EU “rule-taker” and to enforce customs and regulatory controls on goods crossing the Irish Sea. This has brought disruption and difficulties — not all of them yet visible on the shelves or in job losses, but real nonetheless."

Is there a solution?

"Reworking the protocol may be a hopeless ambition (neither London nor Brussels have the appetite for a rematch), but it is not a pointless one. And realistic or not, the question is guaranteed to become an ever-hotter political issue in Northern Ireland. The protocol will play a central role when Northern Ireland holds Assembly elections next year, given that the members of the legislative assembly will be asked to vote in 2024 on whether they “consent” to the continued application of the protocol rules underlying the “border” in the Irish Sea."

At the moment the protocol is the only show in town.  The question is, what happens when it isn't?