Is Britain headed for a disastrous “crash landing” out of the European Union? This is the view of some European politicians concerned at the UK’s “divide and rule” tactics ahead of formal Brexit talks.
A leaked European parliament report seen by the Guardian accuses
Britain of trying to “move the goalposts and do away with the referee”
in the impending negotiations with the EU27 nations.
Guardian readers in Britain and across the EU discussed the
negotiating positions and “red lines” likely to dominate once article 50
is triggered - with many doubting the process would end successfully
for either side.
Below is a selection of their views.
The UK government has failed to manage expectations
RobertBurnsWoodward
20 February 2017 7:30am
The biggest problems are going to be the lack of a coherent
negotiating position by the UK (rather than a wish-list), the lack of
skilled negotiators and the failure of the Government to engage in
expectation management. The third of these problems has the potential to
result in a very nasty backlash. Brexit supporters have been told again
and again that the UK is going to get a fabulous' cake and eat it' deal
and then lots of money will be available for the NHS and other things.
TM and the Brexiteers have fallen into exactly the same trap that DC did
when he went to negotiate with the EU prior to the referendum - they
have promised something that can't be delivered. Time will tell if the
right-wing press will pretend that the final deal is a good one or
simply tear the Government to shreds for not delivering.
The EU will hope for the best and prepare for the worst
I don't think May thinks that. I think it's politically expedient for her to appear as if she does though.
In my country we have saying that if translated litteally boils down
to 'the soups is never eaten as hot as it is served'. There's an element
of tough talk from both sides on this.
Still it would be fair to say that a degree of trust is vital in any
negotiation and starting things off by threatening to become a Tax haven
does runs counter to the 'we want close cooperation ' narrative by May.
The EU is likely to hope for the best and prepare for the worst and
take threats like that seriously and harden its position accordingly.
Lastly divida et impera is noting new but given the fact that after
the Brexit deal a FTA with unanimous agreement will be needed it is
indeed a dangerous strategy. People have long memories on this side of
the channel. And to the long term economic future of the UK the free
trade agreement is more important. So to from my quote Indiana Jones
movie 'choose wisely'.
May will talk tough but negotiate for a soft Brexit
In the EU negotiations there are two benchmarks to check the outcome
against - does the situation advance and improve the UK's position from
what it was prior to the Referendum, and does it ensure that economic
growth continues in the decade after the agreement is reached?
It is difficult to see how any 'hard' version of Brexit could achieve
either benchmark - wishful thinking about 'opportunities' and 'taking
back control' does not a policy make. The risks associated with Brexit
are all on the downside, and it is going to take a lot of compromise,
especially on free movement of labour, for a deal to be struck that does
not greatly disadvantage the UK economy.
My view is that May is talking tough on a hard Brexit but will
negotiate for the softest possible one to avoid the consequential
economic fallout that will inevitably come from a hard and disorganized
exit. I hope this is the case.
The UK is deluded about the strength of its negotiating position
As I've been posting for over a year now, the EU leaders haven't even
begun to fight, and the UK is severely deluded about the strength of
its negotiating position and about the goodwill it still enjoys in the
EU: both of these are diminishing.
The EU27/UK talks are likely to become acrimonious fairly quickly,
given that the British government is clearly acting in bad faith and
ready to use underhand tactics - i.e. diverting part of its aid budget
to bribe eastern European states. If Britain is going for divide and
rule tactics it shouldn't be so glaringly obvious!
I'm sure the EU will offer us a fair deal. But sadly for brexiters,
the EU's idea of 'fair' is vastly different from theirs: brexiters think
a 'fair' deal is for the EU to cave in on everything. It's all going to
go pear-shaped fairly quickly for the UK, because the two negotiating
positions are completely incompatible - and will remain so unless May
makes big concessions. The EU won't: it's more united than ever before
than the UK should get little or nothing of what it wants. Brexit is
brexit, as we've been told repeatedly. That means no sweetheart deals,
and no concessions without painful quid-pro-quos.
It's all too reminiscent of the England football squad: always hyped
up as the 'best team ever', aiming for the final, only to crash out
ignominiously against an underrated 'minnow' country in the first or
second round. It's going to be painful to watch the UK, as it heads for
either a bad deal or, worse still, no deal at all. We can't say we
weren't warned.
I don’t see the point of a divide and rule strategy in a situation in
which every EU country has a veto. Surely it’s in the UK’s interest to
think of a deal no one will want to reject. If the Brits are simply
sounding out the smaller countries, that makes perfect sense. Maybe
that’s all this is? Setting countries against one another or trying to
buy them off individually will just make a deal impossible.
Time-consuming negotiation with the UK might be very costly for the
EU in all kinds of ways. Perhaps there will come a point when the game
isn’t worth the candle and the EU’s best tactic will be to let
everything slide on, noisily but gently, to March 2019.
What do EU countries actually need in the short term, aside from a
financial divorce settlement and clarity for EU migrants? If the migrant
issue (who can live where and on what terms) is to be settled ahead of
the rest, which everyone seems to want, then surely a financial divorce
settlement can become priority number two and everyone be made to focus
on that until it’s resolved.
Those two issues will absorb a huge amount of time and energy by
themselves. They could easily take a year or more. Especially if the UK
muddies negotiations about them by trying to make their resolution
dependent on deals concerning other fields.
All the EU will need to do is make sure no damaging deals are done,
which with a veto for every country shouldn’t be too difficult. If the
UK comes up with brilliant ideas that suit everyone, fine. Otherwise the
EU can ignore all the sound and fury from Britain and turn to more
important matters. Offshore tax haven? Why not call Britain’s bluff?
Tick-tock-tick-tock-tick.
The EU has many internal problems and much internal unrest. Brexit
highlights the extent to which it must change in order to survive. One
major difference between Remainers and Brexiteers is that Brexiteers see
the EU as unchangeable, intransigent, which is why they want out. Personally,
I think the next few years will see a lot of change in the EU. They
will be forced to respond to Brexit, the rise of populism, anti EU
feeling etc. I believe the EU will improve much of what is wrong, and
will become stronger - in many ways at our expense.
In ten years time, we will be looking across the channel at their
economy, at their living standards, at their advantages and we will be
wondering how on earth we were stupid enough to walk away from it.
The irony is that it needed us to leave in order for them to change.
We will bring about the changes that the UK wanted, by not being there
to benefit from those changes. In years to come we will want to rejoin,
but if we are allowed to, it will be on terms much worse than those we
had before we left.
Forget a second referendum, we need a general election
The UK's future in the hands of Messrs Davis, Fox and Johnson. Put in
place by a Prime Minister with no mandate. The democratic way forward
is not a second referendum but an immediate general election. The
current parliament has no legitimacy. The party manifestos on which it
was elected are irrelevant in a completely charged political situation.
Let the parties lay out their proposals for us for negotiations with the
EU and let us choose our future.
I can see no positive outcome from these negotiations, with the
possible exception of mutually agreed rights for current residents. We
will indeed crash out of the EU, with no deal at all, and a probable and
damaging descent into mutual boycotts. The EU has used trade as a
weapon to enforce centralisation in a way that the UK can't take. The
only terms on which we can retain any trading relationship at all are
those of capitulation.
The UK is deluded': readers on the Brexit negotiations
Reviewed by Unknown
on
7:04 AM
Rating: 5
Posts
No comments: