Until I read this article (HERE) by the former Irish PM, Johm Bruton, I had never heard of the Interlaken principles. These principles were announced on May 20, 1987 by Willy de Clercq, the commissioner for external relations, at a meeting of member state ministers from the then European Communities (EC) and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). They may yet turn out to be very important in the coming trade negotiations.
This article HERE explains the principles in a bit more detail. Essentially there are three:
The first is that in developing relations with non-member states the EU will always prioritise its own internal integration. The EU’s interests come first.
The second is that the EU will always safeguard its own decision-making autonomy. In other words, involvement in the EU’s institutions – such as the European Parliament, the Council or the Commission – and decision-making processes is reserved for member states and member states alone. Non-member states have no say even if they are obliged to implement the EU’s decision
The third principle is that any relationship must be based on “a balance of benefits and obligations”. It is not for the non-member state to choose only those aspects of EU integration it likes. Relationships have to involve a balance. And, in practice, that balance is generally tipped very much towards the EU’s interests.
This paper from Belfast University in 2015 (HERE), sets out the same principles but it also makes a point that the British government either does not understand or is trying to circumvent them using the cake and eat it approach much favoured by BoJo and Davis. The paper is about how much flexibility we can expect to achieve, the limits to exceptionalism as the paper puts it.
The EU is not the monolithic, take it or leave it, organisation that is often portrayed by its opponents in the UK. It is surprisingly flexible with some nations in the single currency, some not. Some nations in Schengen, some not. Denmark has opt outs in areas of security and justice. In fact the EU is very complex because of what the paper's authors say is a multitude of special arrangements.
However, these special arrangements are for members only and have never been offered on a permanent basis to third countries even those countries looking to join, let alone countries wishing to leave. They are sometimes offered temporary measures but not in the long term.
Over the years, other countries have tried to cherry pick some sort of associate membership but have never succeeded in getting significant concessions without becoming a member. We are attempting something never successfully attempted before.
