Politics Discussion Thread (Heated Arguing Warning)

[AdrienIer]

Wut ?? How could you possibly read that from my post ?

Because you obviously didn't read my post: it is not the UKs sole responsibility if there is a hard border on the island of Ireland, it is also the EUs. Read the BBC article posted above. There are specific circumstances, that are quite likely in a no deal situation where it is not the UK that causes a hard border to occur but the EU and Ireland.

Is it legalistic? Sure, you can say that. But it would be a decision made by the EU to close the border, not the UK.

If Ireland closes the border, how is that the UKs responsibility? How? We've already had one bomb go off in NI. We don't want a return to the troubles. If this comes to pass and bombs start going off again, how is that purely the responsibility of the UK? That's why I stated the RoI really needs to work with the UK even in a no deal situation to keep things working, and even then... someone is going to do something stupid.

The unavoidable response from the EU and Ireland was labeled early on as "project fear". It was quite obvious from the start. If you kick a bear in the nuts after being told not to do that it's definitely on you. 
So yes the border is 100% on the UK, and everyone agrees on this. The Irish agree. The EU agrees. The European population agrees.

[Krill]

So that is why I ask: if someone starts blowing up bombs again, this, in your opinion, is ok?

[Gavagai]

If you kick a bear in the nuts after being told not to do that it's definitely on you. 

Thanks for saying it because this is what I am trying to point out: EU treats an exercise of a completely legitimate right to leave the EU as a "kick in the nuts". In other words, it does not really believe that there is such a right.

[Gavagai]

@ Gustaran. I am not British and have no opinion on the preferred model of Brexit. The only thing with which I am concerned here is that EU implicitly rejects the right of its members to leave and this is not a good sign for the union.

EDIT: Still, to respond to your question: a custom union with Ireland with Ireland staying inside EU is perfectly possible, this is Lichtenstein model, for all intents and purposes.

[Gustaran]

Exactly. But you seem to think the RoI will accept that they will have to break the Belfast agreement, not the UK.

The RoI will rather be kicked out of the Single Market or at the very least there will be custom checks between the RoI and the rest of Europe.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...xit-border

The only thing I could say with any certainty is this: To even consider this as necessary will weaken the EU more than the UK leaving with a deal, or remaining in the EU. The RoI would need to run into that scenario willingly for it to not have any damaging effect on the EU integrity. And if bombings start again, oh holy fuck.

Hm, that's interesting. It's almost as they are trying to find out out who blinks first. There is no question it would be catastrophic for the EU if Varadkar simply refused to control the border and goods from other countries would start to come in. Then again, it seems he really is between a rock and a hard place. I was not aware that it plays a role who would have to close the border again.

So what could be a solution?

- Is there any chance that the UK will accept a customs border in the Irish Sea? Of course that would mean accepting the backstop, but wouldn't that be a small sacrifice for keeping the peace until further details have been negotiated?
- Is there any chance the UK will ask for an extension in order to negotiate a deal that would keep the UK in the customs union?

If both are impossible, and the Irish border just stays open for a longer amount of time, maybe there would have to be temporary EU custom controls for all goods coming from the British Isles. It's far from ideal, but Brussel will never jeopardize the EUs Single Market through an open external frontier.

[MJW (ya that one)]

UK would use 9/11 and the fact that EU closed the border for an easy victory. I don't think Hard Brexit would happen because Coburn would fall on his sword, so it's ether May's deal or Revoke (thanks ECJ), but the Belfast agreement is no problem. I even think the IRA wouldn't even brother to try to win and is bluffing.

[AdrienIer]

Krill : no, but it was a foreseable consequence of brexit that was disregarded by the leave side. Either they didn't care or they were too stupid to realize there was a problem

Gavagai : kicking the bear in the nuts is with regards to the Irish border. Not in general. The EU has been super fair with the UK

[Gavagai]

- Is there any chance that the UK will accept a customs border in the Irish Sea? Of course that would mean accepting the backstop, but wouldn't that be a small sacrifice for keeping the peace until further details have been negotiated?

No self-respecting sovereign country would ever accept a custom border across its territory, even raising this suggestion is insulting as hell.

[Gavagai]

This exchange about internal custom border, however, opens an interesting perspective. When I first looked at May's deal, my impression was that EU's only intent in negotiation was to humiliate the UK as much, as humanly possibly. But maybe EU officials are just clueless and do not understand on what planet they live.

[Krill]

Exactly. But you seem to think the RoI will accept that they will have to break the Belfast agreement, not the UK.

The RoI will rather be kicked out of the Single Market or at the very least there will be custom checks between the RoI and the rest of Europe.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...xit-border

The only thing I could say with any certainty is this: To even consider this as necessary will weaken the EU more than the UK leaving with a deal, or remaining in the EU. The RoI would need to run into that scenario willingly for it to not have any damaging effect on the EU integrity. And if bombings start again, oh holy fuck.

Hm, that's interesting. It's almost as they are trying to find out out who blinks first. There is no question it would be catastrophic for the EU if Varadkar simply refused to control the border and goods from other countries would start to come in. Then again, it seems he really is between a rock and a hard place. I was not aware that it plays a role who would have to close the border again.

So what could be a solution?

- Is there any chance that the UK will accept a customs border in the Irish Sea? Of course that would mean accepting the backstop, but wouldn't that be a small sacrifice for keeping the peace until further details have been negotiated?
- Is there any chance the UK will ask for an extension in order to negotiate a deal that would keep the UK in the customs union?

If both are impossible, and the Irish border just stays open for a longer amount of time, maybe there would have to be temporary EU custom controls for all goods coming from the British Isles. It's far from ideal, but Brussel will never jeopardize the EUs Single Market through an open external frontier.

The issue that first occurs, to my understanding, is that the UK has to leave the EU before any further negotiations happen. So whatever happens, we either need the withdrawal agreement in effect, or we put that border between RoI and the continent, or NI stays in that customs union.

The first solution you posted harms UK constitutional integrity, which is viewed as a no go from everyone in parliament. The second is basically the withdrawal agreement: the only sticking point is that the backstop is permanent. There is no way out of it. That is the sole change the UK government is trying to g t now, to ensure that the backstop is temporary.

Is this possible? Yes, but Varadkar will not budge, which is where the risk of no deal comes in. I believe Varadkar is playing for all the marbles: he wins if the UK stays in the EU,or if the UK signs the deal. He loses if the UK leaves with no deal for the above reasons. It really does seem like a game of chicken.

The compromise is something like the backstop has a time limit of 5 years, at which point the UK can give notice to leave and then we stick with the WTO security loophole whilst we sort out a free trade agreement that will have had 7 years to get sorted. UK gets a 5 year period of being stuck in a backstop, but after that the EU has a hole into the internal market to act as an incentive to not dick around in trade negotiations.

This is one way to solve it,but it requires Varadkar to back down. I think something like this can happen at the EU summit on the 26th if everything goes wrong between then and now, but...lots has to happen yet.

But it's.worth understanding: so many people agree with the current line taken by RoI that they may not consider it leads back to the Troubles. They may think: it's your fault this happened, you shouldn't have left. Adrien is the perfect example of this.

People can die if this goes wrong. People need to back down: it looks like the ERG will accept the compromise withdrawal agreement, by ensuring it isn't permanent. Will Varadkar refuse that compromise and potentially play a major role in the return of then troubles, return of terrorism to the Island of Ireland?