I don’t think the EU has been instrumental in nationalism dying out, but it certainly has helped to make it less contentious and conflictual. It’s not just the Irish peace process; South Tyrol (the culturally and ethnically German region in the North of Italy) is just as culturally and ethnically German as it ever was, and proud of it, but with the invisibility of the German/Italian border this doesn’t give rise to the kind of political problems, separatist movement, etc, that it used to.
I’ll give you “less contentious and conflictual” if you mean they’re not actually going to war over it, but there still is a separatist movement there. And then there’s Catalunya, Scotland, and the on-again off-again warblings in Belgium…
Yes, OK, on reflection I’d say that EU membership has helped to de-conflict some national/ethnic competitions, but not others. And of course Scots separatism has grown considerably in the context of UK EU membership.
ECSC, EEC , Euratom, EU, were/are at the end of the day legacies of the post 1945 settlement. Even the post 1989 era was basically a continuation of that.
Problem is that settlement is fast becoming less and less useful for the current world we actually live in. A multi-polar, non-Euro based world. The current crises is absolutley David Cameron’s fault, and his public execution should be a feature of any Brexit settlement, at least any just settlement.
However, the EU has displayed remarkable lack of ability to adapt and change to shiftung dynamics. The perception of loss of control was toxic to the brand and this feeling is not just UK specific. So UDS’s posts about lack of British prep while true only tells part of the story.
Could one expect an entity the size and complexity of the EU to be agile, able to change rapidly? I don’t think doing so has done much for the US’s international reputation.
I think this is the reverse of the ROI/NI situation, in that the idea that membership of the EU would require open borders and a single market between iScot and rUK made independence (to that extent) a simpler proposition than otherwise. With the EU backstopping some fundamental aspects of neighbourly relations, independence was less of a leap than it might have been. I would guess something similar is at work with Catalonia - sure, we’ll be separate but, you know, not that separate.
(Of course, post-Brexit that calculation changes. Pro-Union voices in Scotland are now using the example of Brexit as a warning - if you thought leaving the EU single market and customs union was bad, wait till you leave the UK version - while pro-Independence voices are using Brexit as an example of Scotland’s vote being disregarded.)
Is it? Seems to me it becomes more relevant as the economies of scale, dynamic co-operation and eradication of non-tariff barriers is precisely what the modern age requires. A return to the bad old days of bilateralism and nationalism seems to have no answers to the challenges of today.
It is Cameron’s fault in terms of launching a referendum without requiring proper clarity of what precisely Brexit meant, but then, it’s even more the fault of the Leave campaign for making no attempt to do so, and their continued failure to do so even now. That, and the fault of voters for not having the mental acuity to ask such a thing either.
EU saying insufficient progress has been made on the Irish border issue. Does my head in. Brexiters say ‘there is no issue, the UK doesn’t want a hard border’ but refuse to attempt to square the circle of being outside the EU without a hard border.
They won’t, because they can’t. It’s trumpist duck speak.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Malden Capell, the EU has been very good for free trade within Europe. It’s policies for trade outside Europe has been protectionists and down right mercantile. With the rise of trade powers outside N America and Japan, that’s become a hinderance. The majority of world trade now takes place outside Europe and America.
The amount of effort the EU expends in raising barriers to trade to protect German industry like textiles and French agriculture is illuminating.
And yet not a single specific example of how the UK has been hindered by such a thing can be found. We’re one of the best countries in the world to do business. Certainly hasn’t stopped us or Germany from trading worldwide extensively.
Assertion, assertion, assertion.
Now, can you square the circle of the Irish border?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It looks like the UK Government has agreed to “continued regulatory alignment” on the island of Ireland. That could mean that NI remains in the Customs Union and Single Market, or at least a parallel entity. The full text hasn’t been published yet, should be clearer later today.
If a separate form of Brexit can be delivered for NI then I expect Scotland to demand the same.
There seems to be a familiar pattern emerging here.
Everyone, from every side, wails at the impossibility and intractability of the problems and that every side must either be “holding firm” or “caving in” or “talking tough” when in fact all that has happened from the start of this process is that each side is having to compromise. As any sensible person knew they would and as it is proving to be.
It is really so surprising that a compromise has been reached on this and every other issue? of course not. The “divorce bill” is another issue that was destined to be solved. The UK will promise to pay a certain amount and the EU will give certain concessions because of it. That is how it was always going to pan out, rinse and repeat for every other major obstacle. They’ll find a way.
You’re okay with Scotland demanding the same, then? Internal customs checks on the English and Scottish border?
What about within England? Can London demand special treatment too?
It’s a recipe for utter chaos.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Which is exactly why I think May has accepted it. She can then happily say that she tried, but those dastardly Irish/Scottish Nats won’t let her.
If so, it’s a dumb move, as it’s nakedly transparent that it’s unworkable. It would be the death knell of the United Kingdom.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Yeah, if its* implemented*. Not so much otherwise. Ireland Act 1949, guarantees the constitutional position of N Ireland and says no change in the same will occur, without the consent of the Majority of the N Irish people.
Some could argue that customs within N Ireland and the rUK is exactly that. Might be one way out of Brexit.
Even if it were implemented, it’s the worst of all worlds - it would necessitate chaining the UK’s regulatory framework to the EU’s without any input, without Single Market membership of the rest of the UK to compensate.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
You sort of prove the point.
So what happened today then?
It looks very much like there was an agreed form of wording that satisfied London, Dublin and Brussels. All was tickety-boo until Belfast - in the form of the DUP - flexed its propping-up-the-UK-government-muscles, and things fell apart while Mrs May was having lunch with Mr Juncker. Oh dear, how terribly embarrassing.
The internal contradictions of this thing are, I suspect, impossible to solve within the constraints imposed by the UK government upon itself. The only sane way out of this is to either abandon it all together, or to fall back on EEA or EFTA membership.