There have been some Twitter postings by people suggesting that the EU might be open to talks on improving the TCA and perhaps other issues such as security and foreign policy. These are not Tory politicians let me hasten to add, but they are being prompted by Starmer's pledge to 'make Brexit work' which most people assume means re-opening talks with Brussels. Many are people like Anton Spisak at the Tony Blair Institute or Mutjaba Raman of the Eurasia Group, the usual suspects in other words, on the fringes of politics but with close connections in Brussels. There are others who pour cold water on the idea.
Michelle Barnier was one dampening expectations when he appeared on Robert Peston’s show last week and the former chief EU negotiator was asked about the possibility that Labour could ‘renegotiate’ the TCA in 2025 when it comes up for review.
I am afraid I tend towards the more pessimistic and I particularly liked a Twitter response by Niall Ó Conghaile. I am not sure what he is or where he lives, except it’s somewhere in the EU, Ireland I assume but perhaps I'm wrong about that. Anyway, he posted a short thread:
I am not the world's best negotiator*. But I have worked with some genuinely brilliant negotiators enough to have learned a few things.The reaction to @MichelBarnier's comments have been revealing.— Niall Ó Conghaile 🇪🇺 (@nialloconghaile) October 28, 2023
It's an interesting assessment because it brutally exposes the same misunderstanding about the asymmetry of the relationship between the UK and the EU27 that bedeviled the negotiations between 2017 and 2020 when we consistently overestimated our importance. Davis, Gove, and others thought the EU would break all its own rules to accommodate Britain’s demands. We all know what happened.
Some Quotes from the thread:
"I agree with many that Europe would give Labour a hearing. But some points to remember. This is not a commercial negotiation where they try to find an agreement to get the deal done. It's also not like the WA where Europe did stand to lose something if negotiations failed."
"This is a negotiation where Europe likes the status quo, where it is by far the larger party (think you negotiating with Aldi), and where there is no loss from a failed negotiation."
"Any result of a negotiation will be as close to what Europe wants as to be indistinguishable (again, like your negotiations on price and terms with ALDI)."
Mr Ó Conghaile says those 'bleating' about fairness are wasting their time. You can get 'fairness' inside the EU but 'between Europe and a third party' there is no fairness, it's going to be 'raw' he says and I think that's true.
This is his thinking about suggestions that Europe has 'moved on' and is more willing to offer flexible solutions, again a good thread:
Mujabata Rahman is not just wrong here, he's wrong to the extent that I wonder to whom he's talking in Bxl, if anybody.He seems to be talking to a lot of people who are saying what his clients want to hear.Short 🧵 pic.twitter.com/Q8qQCpztNB— Niall Ó Conghaile 🇪🇺 (@nialloconghaile) October 27, 2023
This also coincides with an article in East Anglia Bylines on the same topic by Tomasz Oryński, a Polish journalist and truck driver: Rejoiners have to accept that it’s not all about us!
Oryński says (accurately I think) that “Britain does not consider itself to be an equal – and the EU is the union of equals.” Politicians consistently overestimate Britain's political, industrial, and economic power and still have a 19th-century mindset. Until we accept we are simply on a par with any other EU member state we will never be able to move forward.
All this reminded me of a blog post I wrote in August 2018 when we were still trying to get the shape of the Withdrawal Agreement settled. Crispin Blunt - the man in the news again this week - was Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee at the time and was going around Europe with 'proposals' on security cooperation. Although at pains to say these were not official government policies I assume he had been speaking to ministers and advisers and his ideas gave an insight into government thinking.
In a paper written by the EU's Policy Department for External Relations, Directorate General for External Policies of the EU, someone explains, "London has been increasingly hinting that it wishes to maintain its role within the CSDP (Common Defence and Security Policy)."
"The nature of the requests made by London raise a fundamental problem, which makes them hard to swallow. It is an issue that ultimately reflects all of the difficulties in the Euro-British divorce. If, as a third country, the British should remain involved, one way or another, in the decision-making bodies of the CFSP/CSDP, as they are in fact calling to be allowed to do, they will end up with a status that is equivalent to that of the whole EU. Which means that London would carry the same weight as 27 capitals".
And it went on "...this is exactly what May meant when she said, in her speech in Florence, that her country wanted to ‘work hand in hand with the European Union, rather than as part of the European Union’.
So, it's actually worse than Mr Oryński suggests, not only do we not see ourselves as the equal of any EU member state, but we actually think we are on the same footing as the entire bloc of 27 member states together!!
And as recognised at the time, it goes to the heart of Brexit or as the paper says, "It is an issue that ultimately reflects all of the difficulties in the Euro-British divorce."
I fear that Starmer is about to make the same mistakes as May, Davis, Gove, Frost and Johnson and until we moderate our demands and see ourselves as we really are we will get nowhere in Brussels.
The notion that the EU will take us back simply because we ask nicely while still believing we have some sort of innate superiority is I’m afraid going to end in failure.
